darrenbrett said:
My point is indeed that God will not force His mercy on anyone- this is not because he cannot, but because He will not. He has made the universe in such a way that He respects the free will He has given to man. So all He is doing is being consistent within His nature. To say I'm putting limitations on what God can do is to miss the point.
darren, are you a reformed Christian?
Your profile says that you have been involved in a Vineyard ministry, which is not a reformed ministry, and that you currently attend an EV Free church. I looked up some information on EV Free churches and they are clearly not reformed. The problem with what you are contending, at least in this forum, is that it isn't based on biblically sound doctrine. No one who has knowledge of reformed doctrine would claim that God forces His mercy on anyone so that point of contention is rather moot. I regularly hear Christians claim that God "respects man's free will," as you have here. The problem with such a notion, at least from a reformed perspective, is that it fails to take into account many biblical teachings on the inherent nature and proclivity of man's "free will." The truth of unregenerate man is that his will is only as free as the bondage of his flesh. The ability to make choices is part and parcel of man's constituent nature. This was not lost in the Fall. What was lost in the Fall was any and all desire for good. So, the bottom line is, if God was to "respect our free will" then we would be in a sad state. Not only is our will not free in the autonomous sense that you are portraying, in its unregenerate state it is actually a willing slave to sin.
Secondly, the passage about God having mercy on whom He chooses, when taken in context, is about God doing as He chooses-because He is God. That passage is not referring specifically to the salvation question.
darren, this is not true. The context of Romans 9, starting in verse 6, is a direct reference to Paul's acknowledgement that God's chosen people, the Jews, have gone astray. Obviously this was necessary to fulfill prophecy regarding the promise being spread to the Gentiles. So, Paul tells us that the Jews, to whom pertain the riches of God's covenant, are in a state of willful rebellion. It grieves his soul to the point of wishing that he, himself, were cut off for their sakes. So, he goes on to assure his audience that this apparent disconnect doesn't mean that God's Word does not accomplish what it is intended to accomplish for it is not national affiliation that serves as the basis for our place in the covenant but, rather, the promise is according to God's purpose as shown in His act of sovereign election. So, the question that arises, that Paul preemptively addresses, is whether God's elective purpose is based on something about the individual. The example that Scripture gives us is about as specific as could be given. These humans were not just both Jews. They were brothers. They weren't just brothers. They were
twin brothers. So, here we have two twin brothers. Jewish custom dictated that the blessings of the inheritance, ALL OF THEM, would pass to the eldest son and the younger would serve the older. God shows us that our position in the family hierarchy is not the basis for being chosen because He chose Jacob. So, the natural assumption is that Jacob was chosen because he was faithful to God when Esau was not and God forsaw that. The problem is that Scripture explicitly refutes that as well in verse 11 when it explains that they were chosen before they were born and before they had done any good or evil. Now, many misguided Christians understand this to mean simply that God's choice of Jacob was
linearly before Jacob had done any good or evil but was based on God's foreknowledge of Jacob's works. The obvious problem with that view is that the passage explicitly states, "that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works but of Him who calls." Now, even if God's choice was based on works
not yet committed it would still mean that it was based on works and the Bible could not say that it's "not of works." Some, unfortunatly, try to change the passage to imply that Paul is simply stating that "not of works" merely means, "not of works already done." Not only that destroy the entire explicit message of this passage, it clearly contradicts the flow of the chapter. Think about it. If God told us that He chose Jacob, and everyone else who ends up saved, based on His foreknowledge of what they would do, how would we respond? Well, clearly we'd say something like, "Well, that's fair. If God chooses us because He knows we will choose Him then that only makes sense." Was that the response the Paul, the teacher
par exellance, anticipated to this claim that it is "not of works but of Him who calls?" Clearly not. He says, "What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? Certainly not!" If he meant that God chooses us based on His foreknowledge of our works then, clearly, no one would have the audacity to cry foul. Anyway, then we are told that it is God's perrogative on whom He dispenses His mercy and compassion and that His decision to do so isn't based on either the will of man nor his efforts. This statement about God's mercy is applicable to all of the grace He extends to us but, in this instance, the particular point being made is that God's sovereign election, which most certainly
IS the catalyst for our salvation, is based solely on God's good pleasure and purpose. So, verse 15 most certainly is speaking of salvation though, as you acknowledge, His divine perrogative is not limited to matters of salvation.
One of the things God has chosen to do is to give man free will to decide whether or not he will accept the free gift of salvation through the blood of Jesus.
The problem is that you have cut the Fall of man, and the change it wrought in his constituant nature, completely out of the equation. God gave pre-Fall man a will that was not bound by a sinful nature. Adam chose on behalf of His progeny to disobey God and God imputed the guilt and results of sin to those he represented. One of the results is that man's nature has lost all ability of will to any spiritual good accompanying salvation. He is unable to convert himself or to prepare himself for conversion. Post-Fall man is born with a heart inclined toward sin. He is altogether averse from good and dead in sin to the extent that his inherent unresponsiveness is termed by Paul as a form of "death." God's efficacious purpose in saving those He has chosen before the foundations of the world is shown in His loving act of regeneration. What you purport is that the creation is sovereign and his decision, either for or against God, is the pivot point in his salvation. This is biblically inaccurate and highly anthropocentric. Salvation is something done
TO us, not with us. It is not done against our will because in regeneration man's nature is changed and he is made most willing to this change.
The alternative is a race of robots who are pre-programmed to the hilt. And Scripture just doesn't teach that.
Of course it doesn't, and no one on this forum is purporting such a view. The "robot" label is the unfortunate side effect of those who wish to undermine reformed doctrine without really understanding it. The actual alternative to the idea that God "respects our free will" is that God's love for those who are actually aligned against Him is shown in eternity with election, accomplished in reality by His Son, and applied to us personally by the work of the Holy Spirit.
I don't see how you can have a problem with my take on the issue; it's pretty standard. Unless of course you're an old-school/hardcore Calvinist. If so, I think we'll just have to agree to disagree. I personally think we go astray if we cling too strongly to either an Armenian or Calvinistic take on the issue. The truth is in between. Be blessed.
You do understand that you're in the reformed forum, right?
I pray that I am a old-school/hardcore Calvinist considering that Calvin's take on the Gospel was the most accurate of any theologian that God has graced us with.
God bless
