Gods sovereignty & our free will

[Dan1988]

Not necessarily. Jer 13:18-27 was addressed specifically to the king and queen of Israel. It is not a prophecy for all mankind.

If that is true how does the leopard and his spots and the Ethiopian and his skin apply to believers today? Or do you just arbitrarily pick and choose which parts of OT scripture apply to believers under the new covenant and which do not?

I don't see how that is relevant to this discussion.

Also not relevant to this discussion. I am talking about Jeremiah 13:9-14. Which refutes the belief that God has chosen a certain group people to be saved and a certain group of people to be condemned and there is nothing either group can do to change their situation. You might want to actually read my post and what I say about Jer 13:9-14, above? And Old vs. New covenant does not apply.

The word translated "whosoever"is not open for such a narrow, selective interpretation. That word is πᾶς/pas which basically means "all." The only way it can be grammatically limited to some supposed group of "elect" is if it were written πᾶς ἐκλεκτός, "whosoever of the elect" or "all of the elect." The word ἐκλεκτός/elektos/elect cannot be honestly interjected in John 3:16 to fit one's assumptions/presuppositions.

G3956 πᾶς pas
Thayer Definition:
1) individually
1a) each, every, any, all, the whole, everyone, all things,everything
2) collectively
2a) some of all types
Part of Speech: adjective
A Related Word by Thayer’s/Strong’s Number: including all the forms of declension
Citing in TDNT: 5:886, 795​

Saying this does not make it so.

Wouldn't you agree that Jer 13: 18-27 has an application to us, since all scripture is profitable for us. Then the way I read it is, even though it was directed at King and Queen of Israel it also applies to us in the sense that we cannot claim salvation just because we were born into a royal family. God still judges each one of us as individuals, regardless of the family we were born into.

The leopard and the Ethiopian actually supports the doctrine of election, you can't change who you are. Only god can change you if He draws you to Himself.

Nobody would be saved if God didn't draw them to Himself and we know that no man would choose to serve God and deny his lust if God didn't intervene. The natural man will never choose Christ on his own merit, the Bible is clear about this.

Yes, the "whosoever" does mean "all" who will choose but the question is why do the "all" choose while the others reject, the only biblical conclusion is because God draws them while He leaves the others dead in their sins and trespasses.

The scripture wouldn't make sense if it said "the whosoever of the elect" because every single one of the elect will choose, that's guaranteed by God Himself because He never fails to accomplish His purpose. So we believe that God is the author and finisher of our salvation, if it was up to man then nobody would be saved.

 

[Der Alte]

begin

<D1>Wouldn't you agree that Jer 13: 18-27 has an application to us, since all scripture is profitable for us. Then the way I read it is, even though it was directed at King and Queen of Israel it also applies to us in the sense that we cannot claim salvation just because we were born into a royal family. God still judges each one of us as individuals, regardless of the family we were born into.
The leopard and the Ethiopian actually supports the doctrine of election, you can't change who you are. Only god can change you if He draws you to Himself.
Nobody would be saved if God didn't draw them to Himself and we know that no man would choose to serve God and deny his lust if God didn't intervene. The natural man will never choose Christ on his own merit, the Bible is clear about this.
Yes, the "whosoever" does mean "all" who will choose but the question is why do the "all" choose while the others reject, the only biblical conclusion is because God draws them while He leaves the others dead in their sins and trespasses.
The scripture wouldn't make sense if it said "the whosoever of the elect" because every single one of the elect will choose, that's guaranteed by God Himself because He never fails to accomplish His purpose. So we believe that God is the author and finisher of our salvation, if it was up to man then nobody would be saved.<D1>

end

As in your previous post you have added words to scripture to make it say what you want it to.

ISV Joh 3:16 "For this is how God loved the world: He gave his unique Son so that everyone who believes in him might not be lost but have eternal life.
NIrV Joh 3:16
(16) "God loved the world so much that he gave his one and only Son. Anyone who believes in him will not die but will have eternal life.
ουτως γαρ ηγαπησεν ο θεος τον κοσμον
This for loved the God the world.​

"The world" not "the elect."

ινα πας ο πιστευων εις αυτον
that all the believing unto him.​

"all" not "the elect."
.....You continue to read "elect" in Joh 3:16 when it does not say or imply "only the elect."

2 Peter 3:9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all [παντας] should come to repentance.​

παντας is a form of πας, all.

1 Timothy 2:4
(4) Who will have all [πας] men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.​

God did not elect some people to be saved and some people to be condemned. Peter said "God is not willing that any should perish." "Any" not "any of the elect."
Paul said God "will have all men to be saved." "All" men" not "all the elect." God's will is that ALL men will be saved.

 

[ladodgers6]

How does Gods sovereignty and our free will interact?

I came across a short answer to this question by David Murray, he answers the question quite well.

I'm sure most folks have wrestled with this at some stage. The Bible does answer it as well but not in a small package, it takes a lot of study to learn the truth about Gods sovereignty and our will.

I'm not trying to open Pandora's box here, by asking your view on "free choice" or "predestination" with regards to salvation. That is an entirely different subject. I'm just interested in how our own free will coexists with Gods sovereignty.

I'm sure every Christian would agree that we continue to sin until the day we die, not deliberately but we stumble because of our old nature but we are not given over to sin without restraint. In other words we are in a battle against our fallen nature, which seeks to fulfill the "lusts" or desires of the flesh.

I have had Christians claim that they no longer sin, they show me Bible verses which say things like "go and sin no more". I don't think Christ meant that He expected the woman caught in adultery to never commit another sin. I think He was saying don't be a slave of sin by giving yourself over to serving your sin nature.

How Does God's Sovereignty Work with Our Free Will?

Great question, I hope this will shed some light on it.

Classic Reformed theology follows the best of the ancient and medieval theologians in starting with the incomprehensible majesty and transcendence of God--his absolute difference from creation. The world is not an emanation of God, like the rays of the sun. There is no part of creation, including angels or souls, that is semi-divine. There is the triune God--and then there is everything and everybody else.

This means that the difference between God and creatures is not just quantitative but qualitative. We are made in God's image and likeness, as analogies rather than "a chip off the old block." God does not share his glory or other attributes--including his freedom--with creatures. We depend on other people and myriad circumstances for our well-being. Yet, "our God is in the heavens; he does all that he pleases" (Ps. 115:3).

"Behold, the nations are like a drop from a bucket, and are accounted as the dust on the scales...to whom then will you liken God, or what likeness compare with him?" (Isa. 40:15). No creature can thwart God's ultimate designs (Dan. 4:34-37).

God's being, knowledge, and power are original and unique. God is transcendent. Yet he is also immanent, freely bringing the world into existence, sustaining it by his power, and entering into covenantal relationships with his creatures. "in Him we live and move and have our being" (Acts 17:28). Therefore, we shouldn't think in terms of a single pie that is divided between God and us, but of God's own way of being free (as sovereign creator) and the creaturely freedom that God has given to us as his image-bearers.

This view of the God-world relationship shapes our understanding of "double agency." God wills and works and we will and works, but at no point do we trip over each other. God's agency operates over, in, and with creaturely agency, because God is the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. In every external work of the Trinity, the Father is the source, the Son is the mediator, and the Spirit is at work within creation to bring about the appropriate effect. Yet in all of these works, the triune God and his agency transcend us.

Therefore, God cannot limit his freedom anymore than he can limit his love, knowledge, holiness, or any other attribute. "the earth is the Lord's and the fullness thereof" (Ps. 24:1). Yet this in no way implies that God deprives us of the kind of freedom that he deemed appropriate for creatures. On the contrary, God is generous and liberal in his gifts. Tyrants stalk the earth, consuming the freedom of others in order to amass their own oppressive dominion, but God already possesses all authority in heaven and on earth and can create beings who have their own way of existing, thinking, willing, and acting.

Hope his helps???

 

[The Righterzpen]

I have asked you lots of questions in my last three post which you do not address or only address a few of the questions. I mainly teach by asking questions and letting the student discover his answer.

God is an unbelievable generous Giver not needing anything from His created being, which fits the meaning of unconditional, undeserved, unselfish Love and God being Love.

So just thinking practically what does an unbeliever need God to provide for him, so he can complete his earthly objective?

Atonement is part of what the unbelieving sinner needs, so how does atonement satisfy a personal need you have?

Most Christian people think atonement is satisfying a personal need God, so He can forgive some people, but again God does not need anything and especially something other than or in addition to His Love to forgive (an act of Love).

Christ through His atoning sacrifice will provide humans with the last piece God can provide for humans to help them fulfill their objective, so this act of Jesus is tremendously satisfying to God.

I will start with Ro. 3:25

Paul in Ro. 3:25 giving the extreme contrast between the way sins where handle prior to the cross and after the cross, so if they were actually handled the same way “by the cross” there would be no contrast, only a time factor, but Paul said (forgiven) sins prior to the cross where left “unpunished” (NIV), but that also should mean the forgiven “sinner” after the cross were punished.

From Romans 3: 25 Paul tells us: God presented Christ as a sacrifice of atonement, through the shedding of his blood—to be received by faith. …

Another way of saying this would be “God offers the ransom payment (Christ Crucified and the blood that flowed from Him) to those that have the faith to receive that ransom. A lack of faith results in the refusal of the ransom payment (Christ crucified).

God is not the undeserving kidnapper nor is satan, but the unbeliever is himself is holding back the child of God from the Father, that child that is within every one of us.

Paul goes on to explain:

Ro. 3: 25 …He did this to demonstrate his righteousness, because in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished

I do not like the word “unpunished” but would use “undisciplined”.

So prior to the cross repentant forgiven people (saved individuals) could not be fairly and justly disciplined for the rebellious disobedience, but after the cross if we repent (come to our senses and turn to God) we can be fairly and justly disciplined and yet survive.

God and Christ would have personally preferred Christ’s blood to remain flowing through his veins, but it is I that need to have that blood outside of Christ flowing over me and in me cleansing my heart. I need to feel that blood and know it is cleansing me.

If you think about the crucifixion, you would realize, at the time Christ was on the cross, God in heaven out of empathy/Love for Christ would be experience an even greater pain than Christ. We as our Love grows and our realization of what we personally caused Christ to go through will feel the death blow to our hearts (Acts 2:37). We will experience the greatest pain we could experience and still live, which is the way God is disciplining us today and for all the right reasons because Loving discipline correctly accepted results in a wondrous relationship with our parents. (We can now comfortably feel justified before God.)

Is God blood thirsty requiring innocent blood in order to have the power to forgive?

From Christ’s pray in the Garden it would appear Christ personally desired His blood remain flowing through His veins, so would God out of empathy for Christ also personally desire Christ’s blood to remain in His veins?

Who is needing and desiring Christ’s blood to leave His body?

“John 6: 53 Jesus said to them, “Very truly I tell you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. 54 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day. 55 For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink. 56 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me, and I in them”

I really want life in Christ, eternal life, and having Christ live in and through me, so I am blood thirsty.

I need to believe, realize and even physically feel Christ’s blood, out of His body available for me, to have it (in the form of wine) flow down my throat and over my heart, cleansing my heart and making it holy.

The blood of animals could only outwardly cleanse temple objects and people, but Jews could not drink animal blood, since it would do nothing for them.

God made and emphasized nasty blood to be the source of cleansing, so when I physically drink Christ’s blood symbolically in the form of wine, I can experience a cleansing.

Justification and justified is not an Old Testament word used to ever describe a righteous person, but the New Testament (especially Paul and especially in Romans) use it a lot to describe the way Christians are to be before God, so how does that “happen”?

What does it take for a previous repeatedly rebellious disobedient child to comfortably stand next to their parents (feeling justified)?

What does it take for a former criminal, who has repented of his former behavior, to comfortably stand before a Judge feeling now justified before the judge?

Could you really feel “justified” before your parents, if your older brother took the punishment/discipline you fully deserved in your stead?

Jesus did physically go to the cross, so you do not have to physically go to the cross so in that respect there is “substitution”, but is it penal substitution?

If you are not truly fairly/justly discipline by your Loving Parents, how can you truly know they are your Loving Parents?

Crucifixion is not the payment punishment for your sins, since your sins are way beyond any payment method, but God’s Love is great enough to forgive those sins. Crucifixion is just/fair discipline for your sins and you can be crucified, by being crucified with Christ (similar to the experience God had while Christ was on the cross and to be remembered every time you take the Lord’s Supper).

Yes, Christ crucifixion is described by Christ, Peter, Paul, John and the Hebrew writer as a literal ransom payment, but God is not the unworthy kidnapper and satan is not holding the child out of the Kingdom, so who is hold the child back?

When you talk to the nonbeliever: you do not pray to satan to take the ransom payment and let this child enter the kingdom, but you do try to get the nonbeliever to accept Jesus Christ and Him crucified, which is the literal ransom payment and if he accepts a child goes to the Father.

Briefly: Christ going to the cross provide me a way to be crucified (being crucified with Him) and still live. I want to be crucified (disciplined) by my parent God for all the benefits Loving discipline provides.

Yes! Christ went through the punishment for sin, but that was so I could go through the punishment for sin and not to do it in my stead.

The reason unbelievers do not have their sins atoned for is because they do not allow themselves to be crucified with Christ (part of the atonement process.

To understand “atonement” for sins, we need to understand what the sinner went through for really minor sins (unintentional sins) in Lev. 5 to know the part we play and the experience we are to have.

Much more can be said.

Well, your "asking questions to let the student learn" isn't teaching me anything. It's just confusing. It just looks like you are going off on tangents and you are hard to follow. You apparently have a very different belief about the atonement than I do. You obviously believe God did A, B and C and you need to do X, Y and Z.

 

[bling]

I can very easily dismiss all of those above verses as not supporting the free will movement at all. As I stated before, people can make the Bible say anything they want it to.

You read the Bible through Arminian glasses and I read it with Calvins. so you will never convince me in a billion years to agree with the "free choice movement". I decided long ago to give God all the glory and give mans free choice thing a big rebuke.

If every Jew in the first century had your openness to new ideas would any Jew have been converted?

I do not agree with most of what Arminans teach, but I do know some basic things that I have not found scripture to contradict.

Everything goes back to man’s objective while here on earth. Free will is needed to fulfill that objective.

The God you seem to be describing is not the same God I worship. My God is Love:

God Loves all humans unconditionally and unselfishly (charitably), but most refuse to accept Godly type Love as pure charity in the form of forgiveness, so they do not experience unbelievable forgiveness and thus are not gifted with unbelievable Love (“…he that is forgiven much Loves much…”). Refusing Godly type Love also means they would not be happy in heaven where there is only Godly type Love, so God will not force them to go to heaven.

God is doing everything He can to help those who are still willing to accept His Love and that everything includes: Christ going to the cross, tragedies of all kinds, satan roaming the earth, hell, death and our sinning.

 

[bling]

Well, your "asking questions to let the student learn" isn't teaching me anything. It's just confusing. It just looks like you are going off on tangents and you are hard to follow. You apparently have a very different belief about the atonement than I do. You obviously believe God did A, B and C and you need to do X, Y and Z.

Yes God did A, B and C. God out of pure unselfish unconditional Love does everything possible to help willing individuals fulfill their earthly objective.

Yes! There are lots of things humans need to do, but they only “have to do” one thing. They have to for selfish reasons humbly accept God’s Love in the form of forgiveness. God Loves all humans unconditionally and unselfishly (charitably), but most refuse to accept Godly type Love as pure charity in the form of forgiveness, so they do not experience unbelievable forgiveness and thus are not gifted with unbelievable Love (“…he that is forgiven much Loves much…”). Refusing Godly type Love also means they would not be happy in heaven where there is only Godly type Love, so God will not force them to go to heaven.

After you obtain Godly type Love you can go on to by being compelled by Love allowing the Spirit to lead you to have the Spirit through you does wonderful stuff.

 

[The Righterzpen]

Yes God did A, B and C. God out of pure unselfish unconditional Love does everything possible to help willing individuals fulfill their earthly objective.

Yes! There are lots of things humans need to do, but they only “have to do” one thing. They have to for selfish reasons humbly accept God’s Love in the form of forgiveness. God Loves all humans unconditionally and unselfishly (charitably), but most refuse to accept Godly type Love as pure charity in the form of forgiveness, so they do not experience unbelievable forgiveness and thus are not gifted with unbelievable Love (“…he that is forgiven much Loves much…”). Refusing Godly type Love also means they would not be happy in heaven where there is only Godly type Love, so God will not force them to go to heaven.

After you obtain Godly type Love you can go on to by being compelled by Love allowing the Spirit to lead you to have the Spirit through you does wonderful stuff.

"There's none righteous, no not one. There's none that understand. THERE ARE NONE THAT SEEK AFTER GOD...." Romans 3:11. If there are none that seek Him if left to their own devices; how does one "contribute to their own salvation" without God first acting?

 

[bling]

"There's none righteous, no not one. There's none that understand. THERE ARE NONE THAT SEEK AFTER GOD...." Romans 3:11. If there are none that seek Him if left to their own devices; how does one "contribute to their own salvation" without God first acting?

We do not "contribute anything". Yes there are none righteous and none seek after God, so that is not what happens.
Nonbelieving sinners start out good soldiers of satan fighting their enemy God, but the fight is tiring and some soldiers are wimps.
The wimps give up and surrender to their enemy (God) but God is still their enemy. Theses wimps are just willing to accept their enemies pure charity even though they realize they deserve to be tortured to death for the war crimes they have committed. So what worthy, righteous, noble and honorable thing have they done?
After they are willing to just accept God's charity (Love/grace/mercy/forgiveness) God showers them with unbelievable gifts.

 

[The Righterzpen]

We do not "contribute anything". Yes there are none righteous and none seek after God, so that is not what happens.
Nonbelieving sinners start out good soldiers of satan fighting their enemy God, but the fight is tiring and some soldiers are wimps.
The wimps give up and surrender to their enemy (God) but God is still their enemy. Theses wimps are just willing to accept their enemies pure charity even though they realize they deserve to be tortured to death for the war crimes they have committed. So what worthy, righteous, noble and honorable thing have they done?
After they are willing to just accept God's charity (Love/grace/mercy/forgiveness) God showers them with unbelievable gifts.

I'll accept that analogy, so long as you understand and accept the fact that God's first action, caused them to be willing to surrender in the first place. No one will come to God without first having a spiritual awakening and that is solely the work of God.

 

[bling]

I'll accept that analogy, so long as you understand and accept the fact that God's first action, caused them to be willing to surrender in the first place. No one will come to God without first having a spiritual awakening and that is solely the work of God.

God provides all mature adults with a God given faith ability to be used as we choose. All mature adults place their faith in something or someone. We are repeatedly told not to put our faith in manmade objects, walls, armies, and money, which means we can and do that. Directing our faith toward the creator of the Universe to help us (be charitable to us) is something the lowliest person on earth can do so it is a humbling activity, so it is not worthy of anything.

So yes, God initiates the process, but it is initiated for all mature adults.

 

[The Righterzpen]

God provides all mature adults with a God given faith ability to be used as we choose. All mature adults place their faith in something or someone. We are repeatedly told not to put our faith in manmade objects, walls, armies, and money, which means we can and do that. Directing our faith toward the creator of the Universe to help us (be charitable to us) is something the lowliest person on earth can do so it is a humbling activity, so it is not worthy of anything.

So yes, God initiates the process, but it is initiated for all mature adults.

That does not fit what Scripture says though. There are vessels left to their own destruction. Romans 9:22

15 For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.

16 So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy.

17 For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth.

18 Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth.

Now how does God "harden" people's hearts? (Remove His hand of restraint.)

2 Thessalonians 2:
8 And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming:

9 Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders,

10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.

11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:

12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

 

[Hawkins]

How does Gods sovereignty and our free will interact?

Freewill acts like a processor of a computer. Someone has to provide a list of options for the processor to consume or to choose for it to produce to '0' or '1' as its choice.

God can dictate what options are allowable to appear in your mind for you to make a choice from.

Predestination is actually a predefined set of options God allows one from His Elect to make a choice from for him to display who he is, and thus being saved under open witnessing (of the angels and chosen saints).

1 Corinthians 10:13 (NIV2011)
No temptation has overtaken you except what is common to mankind. And God is faithful; he will not let you be tempted beyond what you can bear. But when you are tempted, he will also provide a way out so that you can endure it.

When we are protected by God, there won't be a temptation which we are incapable of overcoming, as all the options given can be handled by us if we have the correct kind of faith. There is always an escape placed there as one of the options.

Matthew 6:13 (NIV2011)
And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from the evil one.

We need to rely heavily on God and Jesus Christ with faith in order not only to get to the escape provided, but also get to the list the options provided by God. the devil may try his best to add a few more options to the list (he can if you are willing to stray away), or to blur away the escape from you.

 

[bling]

That does not fit what Scripture says though. There are vessels left to their own destruction. Romans 9:22

Romans 9:22 I will address at the bottom.

15 For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.

And who has God had compassion and mercy on if it does not include all those who have accepted his compassion and mercy? God ceases to offer compassion and mercy to those who have refused His compassion and mercy to the point of never making that their free will choice?

16 So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy.

Just because you do reach the point of being “willing” to accept God’s charity (mercy/grace/Love/forgiveness) does not mean you deserve it, it is a free undeserved unconditional gift.

17 For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth.

This does not mean Pharaoh at an earlier time in his life did not make the free will choice to not accept God’s charity and make it so strongly he would never of his own free will choose to accept God’s charity (all of which God could realize). After Pharaoh reached that point he takes on the lesser objective of being used in any way needed to help others that are still willing to accept God’s charity to hopefully accept God’s charity.

18 Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth.

Explained above. The person who still can chose to accept God’s charity can be helped by looking how stupid Pharaoh behaved and what happened to him.

Now how does God "harden" people's hearts? (Remove His hand of restraint.)

The same things that can soften a heart of those that are willing will harden the heart of those who refuse the help. A person unsure can look at what was done and say: “Pharaoh was stubbornly stupid, God did a lot to get him to change and I do not want to be like Pharaoh”.

2 Thessalonians 2:
8 And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming:
9 Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders,
10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.
11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

2 Thess. 2:10 tells us specifically what the unbeliever did not do to be saved and thus also what the believers did to be saved. Paul does not say the unbeliever could not do nor he was not offered Love by God nor was not to do something. The unbeliever only had to humbly accept/receive God’s charity (Love) in the form of forgiveness to be saved.

2 Thessalonians 2: 10 …because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.

The “delusion” comes after they did not accept God’s Love.

The choice is faith (believing/trust) to obvious truth anyone could believe or continuing to pursue the perceived pleasures of sin for a season.

Romans 9:22 What if God, although choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objects of his wrath—prepared for destruction?


This has to be understood in the context of all of Romans but especially Ro.9.

Romans 9

Paul uses two teaching methods throughout Romans even secular philosophy classes will use Romans as the best example of these methods. Paul does an excellent job of building one premise on the previous premises to develop his final conclusions. Paul uses an ancient form of rhetoric known as diatribe (imaginary debate) asking questions and most of the time giving a strong “By no means” and then goes on to explain “why not”. Paul’s method goes beyond just a general diatribe and follows closely to the diatribes used in the individual laments in the Psalms and throughout the Old Testament, which the Jewish Christians would have known extensively. These “questions or comments” are given by an “imaginary” student making it more a dialog with the readers (students) and not just a “sermon”.

The main topic repeated extensively in Romans is the division in the Christian house churches in Rome between the Jews and Gentile Christians. You can just look up how many times Jews and gentiles are referred to see this as a huge issue.



The main question (a diatribe question) in Romans 9 Paul addresses is God being fair or just Rms. 9: 14 What then shall we say? Is God unjust? Not at all!



This will take some explaining, since just prior in Romans 9, Paul went over some history of God’s dealings with the Israelites that sounds very “unjust” like “loving Jacob and hating Esau” before they were born, but remember in all of Paul’s diatribes he begins before, just after or before and just after with strong support for the wrong answer (this makes it more of a debate and giving the opposition the first shot as done in all diatribes).



Who in Rome would be having a “problem” with God choosing to work with Isaac and Jacob instead of Ishmael and Esau? Would the Jewish Christian have a problem with this or would it be the Gentile Christians?



If God treaded you as privileged and special would you have a problem or would you have a problem if you were treated seemingly as common and others were treated with honor for no apparent reason?



This is the issue and Paul will explain over the rest of Romans 9-11.



Paul is specific with the issue Rms. 9: 19 One of you will say to me: “Then why does God still blame us? For who is able to resist his will?”



Who is the “one of you” is this Jewish Christian (elect) or Gentile Christian (elect) or is this “non-elect” individual (this “letter” is written to Christians and not non-Christians)?



Can Jews say they cannot be blamed for failing in their honored position or would it be the Gentiles that would say they cannot be blamed since they were not in the honored position?



Is it really significant when it comes to what really counts, if you are born a gentile or Jew in first century Rome?



Are there issues and problems with being a first century Jew and was this a problem for Paul?



The Jews were created in a special honorable position that would bring forth the Messiah and everyone else was common in comparison (the Gentiles).



How do we know Paul is specifically addressing the Jew/Gentile issue? Rms. 9: 30 What then shall we say? That the Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, have obtained it, a righteousness that is by faith; 31 but the people of Israel, who pursued the law as the way of righteousness, have not attained their goal. 32 Why not? Because they pursued it not by faith but as if it were by works. They stumbled over the stumbling stone.



Paul is showing from the position of being made “common” vessels by God the Gentiles had an advantage over the born Israelites (vessels of honor) that had the Law, since the Law became a stumbling stone to them. They both needed faith to rely on God’s Love to forgive them.



Without going into the details of Romans 9-11 we conclude with this diatribe question: Romans 11: 11 Again I ask: Did they stumble so as to fall beyond recovery? Not at all! Rather, because of their transgression, salvation has come to the Gentiles to make Israel envious. 12 But if their transgression means riches for the world, and their loss means riches for the Gentiles, how much greater riches will their full inclusion bring!



The common vessels (gentiles) and the vessels of honor (Jews) are equal individually in what is really significant when it comes to salvation, so God is not being unjust or unfair with either group.



If there is still a question about who is being addressed in this section of Rms. 9-11, Paul tells us: Rms. 11: 13 I am talking to you Gentiles. Inasmuch as I am the apostle to the Gentiles, I take pride in my ministry 14 in the hope that I may somehow arouse my own people to envy and save some of them.

Rm 9: 22 What if God, although choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objects of his wrath—prepared for destruction?

This verse is not saying all the “vessels” created for a “common purpose” were created for destruction (they were not made from the start by the Potter “clay pigeons”). Everything that leaves the potter’s shop is of great quality. Those vessels for destruction can come from either the common group or the honor group, but God is being patient with them that will eventually be destroyed. The vessels God does develop great wrath against, will be readied for destruction, but how did they become worthy of destruction since they left the potter’s shop with his mark on them? Any vessel (honorable or common) that becomes damaged is not worthy of the potters signature and He would want it destroyed.

To understand this as Common vessels and special vessels look at the same idea using the same Greek words of Paul in 2 Tim 2: 20. There Paul even points out the common can become the honored vessel.

That is a short explanation, since you really need to study all of Romans especially chapters 9, 10 and 11. Also please look at individual laments in the Psalms and diatribes in general, I really cut those short.

 

[The Righterzpen]

Romans 9:22 I will address at the bottom.

And who has God had compassion and mercy on if it does not include all those who have accepted his compassion and mercy? God ceases to offer compassion and mercy to those who have refused His compassion and mercy to the point of never making that their free will choice?

Just because you do reach the point of being “willing” to accept God’s charity (mercy/grace/Love/forgiveness) does not mean you deserve it, it is a free undeserved unconditional gift.

This does not mean Pharaoh at an earlier time in his life did not make the free will choice to not accept God’s charity and make it so strongly he would never of his own free will choose to accept God’s charity (all of which God could realize). After Pharaoh reached that point he takes on the lesser objective of being used in any way needed to help others that are still willing to accept God’s charity to hopefully accept God’s charity.

Explained above. The person who still can chose to accept God’s charity can be helped by looking how stupid Pharaoh behaved and what happened to him.


The same things that can soften a heart of those that are willing will harden the heart of those who refuse the help. A person unsure can look at what was done and say: “Pharaoh was stubbornly stupid, God did a lot to get him to change and I do not want to be like Pharaoh”.

2 Thess. 2:10 tells us specifically what the unbeliever did not do to be saved and thus also what the believers did to be saved. Paul does not say the unbeliever could not do nor he was not offered Love by God nor was not to do something. The unbeliever only had to humbly accept/receive God’s charity (Love) in the form of forgiveness to be saved.

2 Thessalonians 2: 10 …because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.

The “delusion” comes after they did not accept God’s Love.

The choice is faith (believing/trust) to obvious truth anyone could believe or continuing to pursue the perceived pleasures of sin for a season.

Romans 9:22 What if God, although choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objects of his wrath—prepared for destruction?


This has to be understood in the context of all of Romans but especially Ro.9.

Romans 9

Paul uses two teaching methods throughout Romans even secular philosophy classes will use Romans as the best example of these methods. Paul does an excellent job of building one premise on the previous premises to develop his final conclusions. Paul uses an ancient form of rhetoric known as diatribe (imaginary debate) asking questions and most of the time giving a strong “By no means” and then goes on to explain “why not”. Paul’s method goes beyond just a general diatribe and follows closely to the diatribes used in the individual laments in the Psalms and throughout the Old Testament, which the Jewish Christians would have known extensively. These “questions or comments” are given by an “imaginary” student making it more a dialog with the readers (students) and not just a “sermon”.

The main topic repeated extensively in Romans is the division in the Christian house churches in Rome between the Jews and Gentile Christians. You can just look up how many times Jews and gentiles are referred to see this as a huge issue.



The main question (a diatribe question) in Romans 9 Paul addresses is God being fair or just Rms. 9: 14 What then shall we say? Is God unjust? Not at all!



This will take some explaining, since just prior in Romans 9, Paul went over some history of God’s dealings with the Israelites that sounds very “unjust” like “loving Jacob and hating Esau” before they were born, but remember in all of Paul’s diatribes he begins before, just after or before and just after with strong support for the wrong answer (this makes it more of a debate and giving the opposition the first shot as done in all diatribes).



Who in Rome would be having a “problem” with God choosing to work with Isaac and Jacob instead of Ishmael and Esau? Would the Jewish Christian have a problem with this or would it be the Gentile Christians?



If God treaded you as privileged and special would you have a problem or would you have a problem if you were treated seemingly as common and others were treated with honor for no apparent reason?



This is the issue and Paul will explain over the rest of Romans 9-11.



Paul is specific with the issue Rms. 9: 19 One of you will say to me: “Then why does God still blame us? For who is able to resist his will?”



Who is the “one of you” is this Jewish Christian (elect) or Gentile Christian (elect) or is this “non-elect” individual (this “letter” is written to Christians and not non-Christians)?



Can Jews say they cannot be blamed for failing in their honored position or would it be the Gentiles that would say they cannot be blamed since they were not in the honored position?



Is it really significant when it comes to what really counts, if you are born a gentile or Jew in first century Rome?



Are there issues and problems with being a first century Jew and was this a problem for Paul?



The Jews were created in a special honorable position that would bring forth the Messiah and everyone else was common in comparison (the Gentiles).



How do we know Paul is specifically addressing the Jew/Gentile issue? Rms. 9: 30 What then shall we say? That the Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, have obtained it, a righteousness that is by faith; 31 but the people of Israel, who pursued the law as the way of righteousness, have not attained their goal. 32 Why not? Because they pursued it not by faith but as if it were by works. They stumbled over the stumbling stone.



Paul is showing from the position of being made “common” vessels by God the Gentiles had an advantage over the born Israelites (vessels of honor) that had the Law, since the Law became a stumbling stone to them. They both needed faith to rely on God’s Love to forgive them.



Without going into the details of Romans 9-11 we conclude with this diatribe question: Romans 11: 11 Again I ask: Did they stumble so as to fall beyond recovery? Not at all! Rather, because of their transgression, salvation has come to the Gentiles to make Israel envious. 12 But if their transgression means riches for the world, and their loss means riches for the Gentiles, how much greater riches will their full inclusion bring!



The common vessels (gentiles) and the vessels of honor (Jews) are equal individually in what is really significant when it comes to salvation, so God is not being unjust or unfair with either group.



If there is still a question about who is being addressed in this section of Rms. 9-11, Paul tells us: Rms. 11: 13 I am talking to you Gentiles. Inasmuch as I am the apostle to the Gentiles, I take pride in my ministry 14 in the hope that I may somehow arouse my own people to envy and save some of them.

Rm 9: 22 What if God, although choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objects of his wrath—prepared for destruction?

This verse is not saying all the “vessels” created for a “common purpose” were created for destruction (they were not made from the start by the Potter “clay pigeons”). Everything that leaves the potter’s shop is of great quality. Those vessels for destruction can come from either the common group or the honor group, but God is being patient with them that will eventually be destroyed. The vessels God does develop great wrath against, will be readied for destruction, but how did they become worthy of destruction since they left the potter’s shop with his mark on them? Any vessel (honorable or common) that becomes damaged is not worthy of the potters signature and He would want it destroyed.

To understand this as Common vessels and special vessels look at the same idea using the same Greek words of Paul in 2 Tim 2: 20. There Paul even points out the common can become the honored vessel.

That is a short explanation, since you really need to study all of Romans especially chapters 9, 10 and 11. Also please look at individual laments in the Psalms and diatribes in general, I really cut those short.

I know it is God who awakens someone to truth and once awakened, they do not reject it. You will never convince me that ultimate acceptance of God is up to us because if I can frustrate God by my refusal to respond; He is not sovereign.

 

[bling]

I know it is God who awakens someone to truth and once awakened, they do not reject it. You will never convince me that ultimate acceptance of God is up to us because if I can frustrate God by my refusal to respond; He is not sovereign.

I never said: "the ultimate acceptance of God is up to us" and you really should not believe that, God is our enemy even though we reach the point of being will to accept undeserved charity from our enemy.
Does a sovereign God lack the power and/or Love to allow humans to make very limited autonomous free will choices that will allow them to obtain Godly type Love?

 

[The Righterzpen]

I never said: "the ultimate acceptance of God is up to us" and you really should not believe that, God is our enemy even though we reach the point of being will to accept undeserved charity from our enemy.
Does a sovereign God lack the power and/or Love to allow humans to make very limited autonomous free will choices that will allow them to obtain Godly type Love?

Your problem is that given human choice, outside of Divine influence; no one will "choose God". So yes, the awakening that actually causes the realignment of a person's will is so profound that once truly awakened, they do not turn back.

 

[Dan1988]

<D1>Wouldn't you agree that Jer 13: 18-27 has an application to us, since all scripture is profitable for us. Then the way I read it is, even though it was directed at King and Queen of Israel it also applies to us in the sense that we cannot claim salvation just because we were born into a royal family. God still judges each one of us as individuals, regardless of the family we were born into.
The leopard and the Ethiopian actually supports the doctrine of election, you can't change who you are. Only god can change you if He draws you to Himself.
Nobody would be saved if God didn't draw them to Himself and we know that no man would choose to serve God and deny his lust if God didn't intervene. The natural man will never choose Christ on his own merit, the Bible is clear about this.
Yes, the "whosoever" does mean "all" who will choose but the question is why do the "all" choose while the others reject, the only biblical conclusion is because God draws them while He leaves the others dead in their sins and trespasses.
The scripture wouldn't make sense if it said "the whosoever of the elect" because every single one of the elect will choose, that's guaranteed by God Himself because He never fails to accomplish His purpose. So we believe that God is the author and finisher of our salvation, if it was up to man then nobody would be saved.<D1>
As in your previous post you have added words to scripture to make it say what you want it to.

ISV Joh 3:16 "For this is how God loved the world: He gave his unique Son so that everyone who believes in him might not be lost but have eternal life.
NIrV Joh 3:16
(16) "God loved the world so much that he gave his one and only Son. Anyone who believes in him will not die but will have eternal life.
ουτως γαρ ηγαπησεν ο θεος τον κοσμον
This for loved the God the world.​

"The world" not "the elect."

ινα πας ο πιστευων εις αυτον
that all the believing unto him.​

"all" not "the elect."
.....You continue to read "elect" in Joh 3:16 when it does not say or imply "only the elect."

2 Peter 3:9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all [παντας] should come to repentance.​

παντας is a form of πας, all.

1 Timothy 2:4
(4) Who will have all [πας] men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.​

God did not elect some people to be saved and some people to be condemned. Peter said "God is not willing that any should perish." "Any" not "any of the elect."
Paul said God "will have all men to be saved." "All" men" not "all the elect." God's will is that ALL men will be saved.

I strongly disagree that God's will is for all men to be saved, because if that was case then all men would be saved as He is almighty and to suggest that His will fails in any is to say that He can fail to accomplish His will.

I can list around 60 verses which support the Bible doctrine of election and reprobation, but I know that you will add your own private interpretation to them and dismiss them so I won't bother.

So it all comes down to interpretation, God deliberately had His servants write the Bible in such a way that it would baffle the natural man so he wouldn't be able to understand it.

We part ways at the question of God's sovereignty over all things, you refuse to accept that God is sovereign over all things and you limit Him to where you can claim some glory for yourself. You can't have a God who is almighty, all knowing and infinite and then limit Him to your fallen finite limits.

 

[Dan1988]

Freewill acts like a processor of a computer. Someone has to provide a list of options for the processor to consume or to choose for it to produce to '0' or '1' as its choice.

God can dictate what options are allowable to appear in your mind for you to make a choice from.

Predestination is actually a predefined set of options God allows one from His Elect to make a choice from for him to display who he is, and thus being saved under open witnessing (of the angels and chosen saints).

1 Corinthians 10:13 (NIV2011)
No temptation has overtaken you except what is common to mankind. And God is faithful; he will not let you be tempted beyond what you can bear. But when you are tempted, he will also provide a way out so that you can endure it.

When we are protected by God, there won't be a temptation which we are incapable of overcoming, as all the options given can be handled by us if we have the correct kind of faith. There is always an escape placed there as one of the options.

Matthew 6:13 (NIV2011)
And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from the evil one.

We need to rely heavily on God and Jesus Christ with faith in order not only to get to the escape provided, but also get to the list the options provided by God. the devil may try his best to add a few more options to the list (he can if you are willing to stray away), or to blur away the escape from you.

If I understand you correctly, you're saying that God is the One who ultimately causes us to make the right choice by drawing us to Himself. The way you put it seems to leave a bit of room for personal choice, so I just wanted to make sure that your not suggesting that.

Everything we have was given to us by God, including the ability to choose correctly while others who God doesn't draw to Himself will never truly choose correctly. even if they appear to choose correctly they eventually fall away because, God was not the author and finisher of their salvation.

 

[Dan1988]

If every Jew in the first century had your openness to new ideas would any Jew have been converted?

I do not agree with most of what Arminans teach, but I do know some basic things that I have not found scripture to contradict.

Everything goes back to man’s objective while here on earth. Free will is needed to fulfill that objective.

The God you seem to be describing is not the same God I worship. My God is Love:

God Loves all humans unconditionally and unselfishly (charitably), but most refuse to accept Godly type Love as pure charity in the form of forgiveness, so they do not experience unbelievable forgiveness and thus are not gifted with unbelievable Love (“…he that is forgiven much Loves much…”). Refusing Godly type Love also means they would not be happy in heaven where there is only Godly type Love, so God will not force them to go to heaven.

God is doing everything He can to help those who are still willing to accept His Love and that everything includes: Christ going to the cross, tragedies of all kinds, satan roaming the earth, hell, death and our sinning.

We obviously believe in different God's, as my God doesn't love everyone. He hates some so much that he casts them into hell to be tormented in fire forever and ever. I don't know how you can read the Bible and miss this truth, why would a God who loves everyone destroy all mankind and only spare 8 people.

My understanding is God hates everyone who is outside of Christ, please tell me what there is to love about fallen and totally depraved wicked sinners.

 

[Dan1988]

Great question, I hope this will shred some light on it.

Classic Reformed theology follows the best of the ancient and medieval theologians in starting with the incomprehensible majesty and transcendence of God--his absolute difference from creation. The world is not an emanation of God, like the rays of the sun. There is no part of creation, including angels or souls, that is semi-divine. There is the triune God--and then there is everything and everybody else.

This means that the difference between God and creatures is not just quantitative but qualitative. We are made in God's image and likeness, as analogies rather than "a chip off the old block." God does not share his glory or other attributes--including his freedom--with creatures. We depend on other people and myriad circumstances for our well-being. Yet, "our God is in the heavens; he does all that he pleases" (Ps. 115:3).

"Behold, the nations are like a drop from a bucket, and are accounted as the dust on the scales...to whom then will you liken God, or what likeness compare with him?" (Isa. 40:15). No creature can thwart God's ultimate designs (Dan. 4:34-37).

God's being, knowledge, and power are original and unique. God is transcendent. Yet he is also immanent, freely bringing the world into existence, sustaining it by his power, and entering into covenantal relationships with his creatures. "in Him we live and move and have our being" (Acts 17:28). Therefore, we shouldn't think in terms of a single pie that is divided between God and us, but of God's own way of being free (as sovereign creator) and the creaturely freedom that God has given to us as his image-bearers.

This view of the God-world relationship shapes our understanding of "double agency." God wills and works and we will and works, but at no point do we trip over each other. God's agency operates over, in, and with creaturely agency, because God is the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. In every external work of the Trinity, the Father is the source, the Son is the mediator, and the Spirit is at work within creation to bring about the appropriate effect. Yet in all of these works, the triune God and his agency transcend us.

Therefore, God cannot limit his freedom anymore than he can limit his love, knowledge, holiness, or any other attribute. "the earth is the Lord's and the fullness thereof" (Ps. 24:1). Yet this in no way implies that God deprives us of the kind of freedom that he deemed appropriate for creatures. On the contrary, God is generous and liberal in his gifts. Tyrants stalk the earth, consuming the freedom of others in order to amass their own oppressive dominion, but God already possesses all authority in heaven and on earth and can create beings who have their own way of existing, thinking, willing, and acting.

Hope his helps???

Very few "Christians" give God all the glory, majesty, honor, adoration, love, worship, praise, obedience, service, respect and fear that He deserves. Most create a god in their mind who is seeker friendly, one who loves everyone unconditionally no matter how they live their lives.

The Church in the rich west has become like the Synagogue which Christ rebuked for becoming a den of thieves. We are witnessing the same thing happening in the western seeker friendly Churches.

We have all kinds of Churches preaching a perverted man centered Gospel, it's exactly as Paul prophesied would happen in the last days. People are so easily offended when they hear the true Gospel being preached, we have visitors walking out in disgust half way through sermons when the speaker steps on their toes.

We can take comfort in the fact that God is building His Church in spite of mans rebellion. God's Will will be done, no matter how hard the powers of darkness try to stop it.