To Those arguing against Calvinism

Status
Not open for further replies.

Anto9us

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jul 10, 2013
5,089
2,040
Texas
✟95,745.00
Country
United States
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
They don't even realize they are doing it, Jennifer, glibly "owning" THE DOCTRINES OF GRACE as a term.

Perhaps you pointing it out will give them pause to think, I don't know.

I learned what Calvinism is

through Calvinists on message boards

as well as reading Calvin's Institutes and writings by Calvinist authors -- the claim of MISREPRESENTATION is bellowed all the time -- til it sounds like the trumpet-blast of an adult teacher talking in a Charlie Brown PEANUTS cartoon

just BLAH BLAH BLAH sound with no true meaning

I feel the issue of Free Will has more adherents -- by far -- than those of us who specifically call ourselves Arminian.

You want Calvinism represented correctly ? -- talk to the Calvinists who post on message boards -- that's the major source of what non-Calvinists know about Calvinism...

Your own words (you - the Calvinists)...
Calvin's own words...
Beza, Spurgeon, Grudem, Piper, MacArthur and all the books that Baker Books could stack on top of each other...

but I would venture to say it's the Calvinists ON MESSAGE BOARDS that are the first place to look for "what the content of Calvinism is" and the non-Calvinist's understanding of it.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Anto9us

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jul 10, 2013
5,089
2,040
Texas
✟95,745.00
Country
United States
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
AndOne -- why don't you enumerate these "claims" that are incorrect about Calvinism?

Start with the one or two big ones; where we non-Calvinists "do not get it right"

for you realize that the OP and the following post are NOTHING BUT GENERALITIES
 
Upvote 0

Marvin Knox

Senior Veteran
May 9, 2014
4,291
1,454
✟84,598.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
I would recommend not using the term 'the doctrines of grace' to describe Calvinism (or the reformed tradition, if you prefer, though that is a broader and fuzzier term so makes it difficult to discern what is even being discussed) as the term itself implies that other Christians do not believe the doctrines of grace which scripture teaches. It is at best a misnomer and at worst a strawman mischaracterization/misrepresentation of non-Calvinist views.

While doctrine in general is simply something that is 'taught', in Christian terminology Doctrine generally refers to the basic teachings of faith in which all Christians agree.
Question: What are the doctrines of grace? See Answer: What are the doctrines of grace?

I found this article recently that describes how Arminians feel about the term as well: What Arminians Find Offensive About the “Doctrines of Grace”
I respectfully disagree that the term doctrines of grace implies that Christians other than Calvinists do not believe in grace.

Also - there is also no reason to be "fuzzy" about what is meant when Reformed theologians use the term.

Reformed theologians believe in absolute grace for salvation from start to finish - whereas others do not.

Reformed theologians believe that fallen mankind is unable to even believe aside from a direct act of grace being extended to the elect. Others do not. (This is the T of TULIP.)

Reformed theologians believe that only the elect of God are effectually drawn to the Son by the Father - because He gave them to the Son from eternity past. Others do not. (This is the U of TULIP.)

Reformed theologians believe that those so given to the Son will come to the Son without exception. Others do not. (This is the I of TULIP.)

Reformed theologians believe that those who come to the Son are sealed for all eternity and will never again come into condemnation. (This is the P of TULIP.) Some others believe that as well. Most do not.

I do not address the L in TULIP as it is not believed by many Reformed nor was it believed by John Calvin himself.

These 4 doctrines are all about salvation by absolute grace from start to finish with regards to salvation . Most others do not believe in absolute grace in the way that Reformed theologians believe in it.

Most certainly - most "evangelicals" outside the Reformed camp believe in some form of grace. But none believe in absolute grace from start to finish as pertains to salvation in the way that Reformed theologians do.

If others are offended by Reformed theologians stressing absolute grace in their theology with regard to salvation -- with all due respect -- that's their problem.

We believe that it is God Himself who is the author of our individual faith. We believe that He will complete the work which "He" began in us.

If you feel that you want to use the term "doctrines of grace" yourself for your belief system - by all mean do so. Of course that is your privileged.

But be prepared to be shown that your use of the term is not as all inclusive as the Reformed use of the term is.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

FireDragon76

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Apr 30, 2013
30,637
18,535
Orlando, Florida
✟1,260,418.00
Country
United States
Faith
United Ch. of Christ
Politics
US-Democrat
How do Calvinists understand the Gospel's efficacy if reprobation is unconditional and chosen by God?

That's my main question as a Lutheran, and something I never understood about Calvinism. Which is one reason among many, I am Lutheran.

I'm not looking to argue, just to understand more how Calvinists approach this issue. I was attending the Episcopal church for a while, and the preaching was very much influenced by Calvinism, and I kept feeling depression alot because I felt God had chosen me for reprobation and I kept wondering if I really had faith. That all went away when I became Lutheran and received catechism, and accepted that God's grace was really present in the sacraments, and wasn't just conditional.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Anto9us

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jul 10, 2013
5,089
2,040
Texas
✟95,745.00
Country
United States
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
If others are offended by Reformed theologians stressing absolute grace in their theology with regard to salvation -- with all due respect -- that's their problem.

And if Calvinists are offended by what THEY PERCEIVE as their opponents "misrepresenting Calvinism", then whether with respect or without it -- that's the Calvinists' problem.

Go make a thread complaining about it -- complain about the "misrepresentations" without giving one solitary example of them -- go whine that the opponents of Calvinism misrepresent it...
 
Upvote 0

Marvin Knox

Senior Veteran
May 9, 2014
4,291
1,454
✟84,598.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
And if Calvinists are offended by what THEY PERCEIVE as their opponents "misrepresenting Calvinism", then whether with respect or without it -- that's the Calvinists' problem. Go make a thread complaining about it -- complain about the "misrepresentations" without giving one solitary example of them -- go whine that the opponents of Calvinism misrepresent it...
No - I won't "go" anywhere I don't want just because you got your nose out of joint.

Jennifer took exception to my using the term "doctrines of grace".

I explained why it was appropriate that Reformed theologians stress grace in the summation of their theology.

I told her that she was, of course, more than welcome to use the term herself if she was of a mind to. You are welcome as well.

But you do not believe in absolute and complete grace with regards to salvation - just as Jennifer doesn't.

It is a partial grace you believe in with regards to salvation. Of course it's grace on God's part to die for our sins and it's grace on His part to offer salvation to the world.

But we believe that without special grace extended to people they would not come to Him even so. Witness Paul as an example if you don't want to believe direct quotes from the scriptures.

It is not hard to understand why Reformed use the all inclusive term they use and why you and Jennifer do not. But by all mean go ahead if you want to. You have my permission.

But don't tell me to go start my own thread when I merely (and politely) answered a query about my use of the term.

My original post had to do with the general lumping of believers in to two distinct camps - Calvinist and Arminian. I commented on why that was unwise and why it added to the problem the OP addressed. I also presented the problem as one stemming from both side of the aisle.

If you want a thread to argue in a petty way - you go start one. This thread, I hope, is for civil discussion.
complain about the "misrepresentations" without giving one solitary example of them
Here is a solitary example for you - and don't pretend you are not aware of it.

"Calvinist doctrine makes men into robots, automatons and puppets - forces them to believe, forces them to not believe - and the Reformed doctrine of predestination takes away the free will choices of men for salvation."
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Nux
Upvote 0

Anto9us

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jul 10, 2013
5,089
2,040
Texas
✟95,745.00
Country
United States
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
"Calvinist doctrine makes men into robots, automatons, puppets, forces them to believe, forces them to not believe - and the Reformed doctrine of predestination takes away the free will choices of men for salvation."

In all seriousness, how is that a "misrepresentation"?

If Calvinism does NOT take away the free will choices of men for salvation, then let Calvinists say

"men have a free will choice for salvation";

or counter the notion somehow that men are made into robots, automatons, puppets, forced to believe or not to -- I mean -- here is the chance to explain WHY your statement that I quoted does NOT represent Calvinism.
 
Upvote 0

Marvin Knox

Senior Veteran
May 9, 2014
4,291
1,454
✟84,598.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
In all seriousness, how is that a "misrepresentation"?

If Calvinism does NOT take away the free will choices of men for salvation, then let Calvinists say

"men have a free will choice for salvation";

or counter the notion somehow that men are made into robots, automatons, puppets, forced to believe or not to -- I mean -- here is the chance to explain WHY your statement that I quoted does NOT represent Calvinism.

Thank you for the opportunity.:)

I cannot address every variance in Reformed thinking that there is the church around the world any more than you could those in non Reformed thinking.

But The Westminster Confession of Faith is generally considered the best authority outside of the scriptures themselves on what is Reformed (or Calvinistic) doctrine. Excerpts from that document follow.

Chapter III - Of God's Eternal Decree
I. God from all eternity, did, by the most wise and holy counsel of His own will, freely, and unchangeably ordain whatsoever comes to pass; yet so, as thereby neither is God the author of sin, nor is violence offered to the will of the creatures; nor is the liberty or contingency of second causes taken away, but rather established.

Chapter V - Of Providence
II. Although, in relation to the foreknowledge and decree of God, the first Cause, all things come to pass immutably, and infallibly; yet, by the same providence, He orders them to fall out, according to the nature of second causes, either necessarily, freely, or contingently.

Chapter IX - Of Free Will
I. God has endued the will of man with that natural liberty, that is neither forced, nor, by any absolute necessity of nature, determined good, or evil.

IV. When God converts a sinner, and translates him into the state of grace, He frees him from his natural bondage under sin; and, by His grace alone, enables him freely to will and to do that which is spiritually good; yet so, as that by reason of his remaining corruption, he does not perfectly, or only, will that which is good, but does also will that which is evil.

You may think that they are logically contradictory positions. I - and thousands of the best, scripture based only, theologians in the world over hundreds of years - do not.

But they do represent what Calvinists teach about predestination related to the free will of men.

To say that Calvinism teaches about “robots, puppets, automatons” and that it teaches that man does not have free will is simply misrepresenting their beliefs.

You have made the charge that Calvinism teaches something the WCF goes out of it's way to not allow you to accurately say about their beliefs.

If you believe that predestination and free will cannot logically co-exist - it is up to you and not me to show why you believe that to be so - logically.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Reformed2

Active Member
Site Supporter
May 4, 2017
365
222
Delete
✟69,056.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Free will exists, in that we are free to sin. Our free will is bonded to sin. We do not have free will as far as "coming to Christ". Romans 9, John 6:44, John 10:27-30 clearly explain the doctrine of irresistible grace.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nux
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Ron Gurley

What U See is What U Get!
Site Supporter
Sep 22, 2015
4,000
1,029
Baton Rouge, LA
Visit site
✟87,895.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
“CALVIN’S T.U.L.I.P.” is a “system of theology” that has become to be known as “Calvinism” because John Calvin in the 1500’s was credited with developing it. Calvin lived between 1509-1564 A.D.

REF: Calvin’s TULIP - What Do The Scriptures Say?

There is no question that CALVIN’S TULIP is in conflict with God’s Word.

5 points of Original "Calvinism":

Total Depravity,
Unconditional Election,
Limited Atonement,
Irresistible Grace, and
Perseverance of the Saints.

Total Depravity
contradicts the free moral agency of man and infers that no person can serve God of his own "free will".

Unconditional Election is wrong because it says that God irrevocably pre-destined the salvation or damnation of every person, without any regard to the good or evil he may do and his spiritual state.

Limited Atonement is wrong because it says that the blood of Christ is not available for all men.

Irresistible Grace is wrong because it teaches the direct operation of God the Holy Spirit ONLY on the hearts of those God has chosen to save.

Perseverance Of The Saints is wrong because it says that a child of God can fall from the grace of God and be eternally lost. OSAS + Eternal Security of the believer's salvation.

Calvin’s Tulip is wrong, it is a deluding influence, and we must be people who love the truth so as to be saved.
 
Upvote 0

Reformed2

Active Member
Site Supporter
May 4, 2017
365
222
Delete
✟69,056.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
“CALVIN’S T.U.L.I.P.” is a “system of theology” that has become to be known as “Calvinism” because John Calvin in the 1500’s was credited with developing it. Calvin lived between 1509-1564 A.D.

REF: Calvin’s TULIP - What Do The Scriptures Say?

There is no question that CALVIN’S TULIP is in conflict with God’s Word.

5 points of Original "Calvinism":

Total Depravity,
Unconditional Election,
Limited Atonement,
Irresistible Grace, and
Perseverance of the Saints.

Total Depravity
contradicts the free moral agency of man and infers that no person can serve God of his own "free will".

Unconditional Election is wrong because it says that God irrevocably pre-destined the salvation or damnation of every person, without any regard to the good or evil he may do and his spiritual state.

Limited Atonement is wrong because it says that the blood of Christ is not available for all men.

Irresistible Grace is wrong because it teaches the direct operation of God the Holy Spirit ONLY on the hearts of those God has chosen to save.

Perseverance Of The Saints is wrong because it says that a child of God can fall from the grace of God and be eternally lost. OSAS + Eternal Security of the believer's salvation.

Calvin’s Tulip is wrong, it is a deluding influence, and we must be people who love the truth so as to be saved.

Care to do an exegisis for us on Romans 9 then? Also, what did Jesus mean in John 6:44? How come God loved Jacob yet hated Esau, before they were formed in the womb?

Do you preach universalism? Open theism? Does every one go to heaven? Is your gospel man centered, or God centered?
 
Upvote 0

Ron Gurley

What U See is What U Get!
Site Supporter
Sep 22, 2015
4,000
1,029
Baton Rouge, LA
Visit site
✟87,895.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
Response to Post #32:

Please provide answers to your too numerous questions!

1. No
2.
John 6: 41-51...Jesus's Words to the Jews...the bread/blood metaphor
47 Truly, truly, I say to you, he who believes has eternal (spiritual) life. 48 I am the bread of life.(metaphor)
3. God foreknew Esau would squander his inheritance.
4. No. False doctrine
5. "Open theism"?

REF: What is Open Theism? | CARM.org

My opinion is that "openness" is a dangerous teaching that undermines the sovereignty, majesty, infinitude, knowledge, existence, and glory of God and exalts the nature and condition of man's own "free will". Though the open theists will undoubtedly say it does no such thing, it goes without saying that the God of Open Theism is not as knowledgeable or as ever-present as the God of orthodoxy.
6. No
7. My "gospel" is Jesus' "gospel of God / gospel of heaven:

Summary of the "gospel"?:

Jesus the Christ, the God-Man, Son of God, Son of Man, THE Divine Messiah, TRUE Man, TRUE God, (many names/titles) etc...
has come down / was sent down from the heavenly realms to earth to SAVE Man from eternal spiritual death (separation from God).

GOOD NEWS! GLAD TIDINGS!

"the gospel" >used only in the NT!<...Greek 2098...euaggelion...
as the Messianic rank of Jesus was proved by his words, his deeds, and his death,
the narrative of the sayings, deeds, death, and resurrection of Jesus the Christ
came to be called the "gospel" or "glad tidings".

Mark 1:14-15 (NASB)...Jesus Preaches in Galilee
Now after John (the Baptizer) had been taken into custody, Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the "gospel of God",and saying,
“The time (prophecy) is fulfilled, and
the "kingdom of God" (Jesus) is AT HAND; (Jesus the Divine Messaiah has COME!)
Repent (turn to God) AND BELIEVE in the (this?) "gospel".”

Jesus was the personification of the "Kingdom of God".

Luke 17:21...nor will they say, ‘Look, here it is!’ or, ‘There it is!’ For behold, the "kingdom of God" is (standing) in your midst.”

GOSPEL of the KINGDOM / GOSPEL of GOD

Matthew 4:23 (NASB) (see also Matthew 9:15; Matthew 24:14)
... [ Ministry in Galilee /synagogues + Prophecy of the end of the ages]
Jesus was going throughout all Galilee, teaching in their synagogues and
proclaiming "the gospel of the kingdom", and
healing every kind of disease and every kind of sickness among the people.

Ephesians 1:13..In Him, you also, after listening to the message of truth,
the gospel of your salvation — having also believed,
you were sealed in Him with (God) the Holy Spirit of promise,

1 Timothy 1:11...according to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, with which I have been entrusted.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Reformed2

Active Member
Site Supporter
May 4, 2017
365
222
Delete
✟69,056.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Response to Post #32:

Please provide answers to your too numerous questions!

1. No
2.
John 6: 41-51...Jesus's Words to the Jews...the bread/blood metaphor
47 Truly, truly, I say to you, he who believes has eternal (spiritual) life. 48 I am the bread of life.(metaphor)
3. God foreknew Esau would squander his inheritance.
4. No. False doctrine
5. "Open theism"?

REF: What is Open Theism? | CARM.org

My opinion is that "openness" is a dangerous teaching that undermines the sovereignty, majesty, infinitude, knowledge, existence, and glory of God and exalts the nature and condition of man's own "free will". Though the open theists will undoubtedly say it does no such thing, it goes without saying that the God of Open Theism is not as knowledgeable or as ever-present as the God of orthodoxy.
6. No
7. My "gospel" is Jesus' "gospel of God / gospel of heaven:

Summary of the "gospel"?:

Jesus the Christ, the God-Man, Son of God, Son of Man, THE Divine Messiah, TRUE Man, TRUE God, (many names/titles) etc...
has come down / was sent down from the heavenly realms to earth to SAVE Man from eternal spiritual death (separation from God).

GOOD NEWS! GLAD TIDINGS!

"the gospel" >used only in the NT!<...Greek 2098...euaggelion...
as the Messianic rank of Jesus was proved by his words, his deeds, and his death,
the narrative of the sayings, deeds, death, and resurrection of Jesus the Christ
came to be called the "gospel" or "glad tidings".

Mark 1:14-15 (NASB)...Jesus Preaches in Galilee
Now after John (the Baptizer) had been taken into custody, Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the "gospel of God",and saying,
“The time (prophecy) is fulfilled, and
the "kingdom of God" (Jesus) is AT HAND; (Jesus the Divine Messaiah has COME!)
Repent (turn to God) AND BELIEVE in the (this?) "gospel".”

Jesus was the personification of the "Kingdom of God".

Luke 17:21...nor will they say, ‘Look, here it is!’ or, ‘There it is!’ For behold, the "kingdom of God" is (standing) in your midst.”

GOSPEL of the KINGDOM / GOSPEL of GOD

Matthew 4:23 (NASB) (see also Matthew 9:15; Matthew 24:14)
... [ Ministry in Galilee /synagogues + Prophecy of the end of the ages]
Jesus was going throughout all Galilee, teaching in their synagogues and
proclaiming "the gospel of the kingdom", and
healing every kind of disease and every kind of sickness among the people.

Ephesians 1:13..In Him, you also, after listening to the message of truth,
the gospel of your salvation — having also believed,
you were sealed in Him with (God) the Holy Spirit of promise,

1 Timothy 1:11...according to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, with which I have been entrusted.

Everyone see this, he attacks the gospel of grace yet REFUSES to articulate his attack with scripture. You are intellectually lazy (all you do is copy and paste other verses) and your theology is biblically weak. No point in bothering with you. Your bible might not have Romans 9 in it, mine does.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: sdowney717
Upvote 0

Ron Gurley

What U See is What U Get!
Site Supporter
Sep 22, 2015
4,000
1,029
Baton Rouge, LA
Visit site
✟87,895.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
Response to ad hominem Post #34

OP: Q: To Those arguing against "Calvinism"

I join the orthodox majority of theologians who attack ~1550 errroneous "Calvinism".

I do NOT: "attack the {gospel of grace}".

Romans 9(NASB)...Solicitude for Israel

1 I am telling the truth in Christ, I am not lying, my conscience testifies with me in the Holy Spirit,
2 that I have great sorrow and unceasing grief in my heart.
3 For I could wish that I myself were accursed,
separated from Christ for the sake of my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh,
4 who are Israelites,
to whom belongs
the adoption as sons, and
the glory and
the covenants and
the giving of the Law and
the temple service and
the promises,
5 whose are the fathers, and
from whom is the Christ according to the flesh,
who is over all, God blessed [c]forever. Amen.

6 But it is not as though the word of God has failed.
For they are not all Israel who are descended from Israel;
7 nor are they all children because they are Abraham’s descendants, but:
“through Isaac (Israel) your descendants will be named.”
8 That is,
it is not the "children of the flesh" who are "children of God",
but the "children of the promise" are regarded as descendants.
9 For this is the word of promise:
“At this time I will come, and Sarah shall have a son.”

10 And not only this, but there was Rebekah also,
when she had conceived twins by one man, our father Isaac;
11 for though the twins were not yet born and had not done anything good or bad, so that God’s purpose according to His choice would stand,
not because of works but because of Him who calls,
12 it was said to her,
“The older will serve the younger.”
13 Just as it is written, “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.”

>>>God loving Jacob and hating Esau has nothing to do with the human emotions of love and hate.
It has everything to do with God choosing one man and his descendants and rejecting another man and his descendants.

God foreknows all. God irrevocably PRE-DESTINES nothing!

Why did God love Jacob and hate Esau (Malachi 1:3; Romans 9:13)?

Who was Rebekah in the Bible?

Answer: Rebekah in the Bible was the wife of Isaac and mother of Jacob and Esau. We first meet Rebekah in Genesis 24:15, where she is identified as “the daughter of Bethuel son of Milkah, who was the wife of Abraham’s brother Nahor.” This would have made Rebekah a great-niece to Abraham and second cousin to Isaac.

Abraham had been looking for a wife for his son, Isaac, but he was unwilling for Isaac to marry a Canaanite—Abraham and his family were living in Canaan at the time. So Abraham sent his servant to his own kinsmen, to the city of Nahor, to find a wife for Isaac. The servant came to a well and prayed that God would give him success in this mission. Specifically, he prayed that whichever young woman provided water for him and his camels would be God’s choice to be Isaac’s wife. As the servant was praying, along came a beautiful young virgin named Rebekah, who not only gave the servant a drink but also watered his camels, providing the sign to Abraham’s servant that she was the appointed bride (Genesis 24:10–28).

Everything was settled peaceably between Abraham’s servant and Rebekah’s father—and her brother, Laban—and the servant took Rebekah back to Isaac. Isaac and Rebekah were married (Genesis 24:67), but for many years Rebekah could not have children. Isaac prayed for his wife; the Lord answered his prayer, and Rebekah became pregnant (Genesis 25:21). Rebekah became the mother of Jacob and Esau, the first twins mentioned in the Bible (Genesis 25:22–24). From these twins came two conflicted nations. God gave Rebekah a prophecy during her pregnancy. She had noticed that the twins were struggling against one another in her womb, and she asked the Lord why they were fighting. The Lord told her that two nations were in her womb and that those nations would be at odds with one another (Genesis 25:22–23). This prophecy came true. Jacob, whose name was later changed to Israel (Genesis 32:28), became the father of the twelve tribes of Israel. Esau became the father of the Edomites, who warred against Israel for ages and were finally wiped out (Obadiah 1:1—21).

Esau was born first, and he was Isaac’s favorite son (Genesis 25:28). The younger Jacob was Rebekah’s favorite. As the firstborn, Esau was due the birthright, but Rebekah helped Jacob deceive Isaac so that the blessing would fall to the younger son instead of to the elder (Genesis 27:1–40).

When Esau discovered Jacob and Rebekah’s deceit, he planned to kill Jacob. Rebekah devised a plan to help save her favorite son, but it again involved deceiving her husband, Isaac. Rebekah made up an excuse to send Jacob to her brother, Laban, to look for a wife for himself (Genesis 27:41–46). Deceit was apparently a family trait.

Rebekah’s marriage to Isaac was the result of God’s providence, her pregnancy was an answer to prayer, and the lives of her sons fulfilled prophecy. Rebekah’s choice to lie and deceive her husband is an example of how wrongdoing in human beings does not thwart the plans of God and how God can ultimately bring about His will, through His mercy and wisdom, despite our sin (see Genesis 50:20)....<<<
============================
14 What shall we say then? There is no injustice with God, is there? May it never be!
15 For He says to Moses,
“I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and
I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.”
16 So then it does not depend on the man who wills or the man who runs, but on God who has mercy.
17 For the Scripture says to Pharaoh,
“For this very purpose I raised you up, to demonstrate My power in you, and that My name might be proclaimed throughout the whole earth.”
18 So then He has mercy on whom He desires, and He hardens whom He desires.

19 You will say to me then,
“Why does He still find fault? For who resists His will?”
20 On the contrary, who are you, O man, who answers back to God?
The thing molded will not say to the molder,
“Why did you make me like this,” will it?
21 Or does not the potter have a right over the clay,
to make from the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for common use?
22 What if God, although willing to demonstrate His wrath and to make His power known,
endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction?
23 And He did so to make known the riches of His glory upon vessels of mercy, which He prepared beforehand for glory,
24 even us, whom He also called, not from among Jews only, but also from among Gentiles. 25 As He says also in Hosea,


“I will call those who were not My people, ‘My people,’
And her who was not beloved, ‘beloved.’”
26
“And it shall be that in the place where it was said to them, ‘you are not My people,’
There they shall be called sons of the living God.”
27 Isaiah cries out concerning Israel, “Though the number of the sons of Israel be like the sand of the sea, it is the remnant that will be saved; 28 for the Lord will execute His word on the earth, thoroughly and quickly.”

29 And just as Isaiah foretold,

“Unless the Lord of Sabaoth had left to us a posterity,
We would have become like Sodom, and would have resembled Gomorrah.”

30 What shall we say then?
That Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, attained righteousness,
even the righteousness which is by faith;
31 but Israel, pursuing a (Mosiac) Law of righteousness, did not arrive at that law.
32 Why?
Because they did not pursue it by faith, but as though it were by works.
They stumbled over the stumbling stone, 33 just as it is written,

“Behold, I lay in Zion (Israel) a stone of stumbling and a rock of offense,
And he who believes in Him will not be disappointed.”
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Paidiske

Clara bonam audax
Site Supporter
Apr 25, 2016
34,220
19,067
44
Albury, Australia
Visit site
✟1,505,837.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
red-strawberry-hat-wool-beret-girls-winter-wear20667.jpg

MOD HAT ON
This thread will remain closed.
A reminder that CF rules require you to:
Maintain the peace and harmony of CF by not rehashing alleged grievances or disputes, publicly complaining about posts, threads, Christian Forums or its staff.​
MOD HAT OFF
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.