Hey JM (you are in red),
You said,
And who was not willing? The religious leaders of Jerusalem were preventing people from gathering around Christ. This is thoroughly established in the chapter beginning at v.2. The subject is the unwillingness of the religious leaders to allow Christ to gather "thy children" and is not about a universalist call to salvation or a description of Christ trying to save and not being able to.
Okay, so according to you it is the leaders who were unwilling to allow the believers to be gathered unto Christ, even though He longed to gather those believers unto Himself. Boy, you seem to be giving the scribes and Pharisees a lot of power. Was the unwillingness of the leaders too much for God? Your interpretation does not alleviate your quandary.
According to Luke’s account, the believers (your interpretation) were not gathered and would be dashed to the ground because although He longed to gather them He could not because of the unwillingness of others (the leaders). So, the believers were just going to have to suffer the consequences of not being gathered.
Luke 19:41-44
As he approached Jerusalem and saw the city, he wept over it 42 and said, "If you, even you, had only known on this day what would bring you peace-but now it is hidden from your eyes. 43 The days will come upon you when your enemies will build an embankment against you and encircle you and hem you in on every side. 44 They will dash you to the ground, you and the children within your walls. They will not leave one stone on another, because you did not recognize the time of God's coming to you."
So, the questions I originally posed still stand. (Just read them in reference to the leaders.)
Oh, by the way, just so it is on the record. I will not go into it because it doesn’t affect my questions, but I definitely do not agree with your interpretation.
God could have made the leaders willing. He could have caused them to not kill the prophets. He could have had them allow the “believers / children” to gather to Jesus. This being the case…
Why would Jesus weep over and long for something the Father had not willed? It was within God’s power, and His power alone (monergism), to change the unwilling to become willing. Fallen, depraved unregenerate men could not help but reject the prophets and be unwilling to come to Jesus. It seems according to Calvinism, He (the Spirit) could have made them willing, however, He opted not to do so (according to the good pleasure of the Father). Jesus should have known this. So again, why did Jesus weep over something He (Godhead) alone could change, and if He really longed to gather them, wouldn’t the Spirit have irresistibly drawn them?
You go on to say,
Again, in more detail...
Who is ‘Jerusalem’ in the context of this passage? A bad interpretation of this passage is to read and believe Jerusalem to be in reference to individual Jews, but this can’t be.
Jerusalem is comprised of individuals. This cannot be?
Starting at the beginning of Matthew 23 we find our Lord speaking of the leaders of Jerusalem, the Scribes and Pharisee, those who killed the prophets:
v. 2 “...Pharisees sit in Moses sit...”
v. 6 “...chief seats in the synagogues...”
v. 7 “...Rabbi, Rabbi...”
v. 13 “But woe unto you, Scribes and Pharisees...”
v. 14 “Woe unto you, Scribes and Pharisees...”
v. 15 “Woe unto you, Scribes and Pharisees...”
v. 16 “Woe unto you, ye blind guides...”
etc, etc. I think you get the picture.
True.
Another look at Matt. 23:37, Okay.
“O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!”
Jesus isn’t calling the leaders to gather He is calling ‘thy children’ or believers,
Ineffectively, due to the unwillingness of the leaders (according to you).
‘Jerusalem’ or the leaders and rulers of Jerusalem are not being called to gather at all. The leaders wouldn’t allow the faithful of God to come together, God wasn’t seeking to bring together those who ‘killest the prophets’ but the faithful.
how often I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, but you were not willing.
They will dash you to the ground, you and the children within your walls. They will not leave one stone on another, because you did not recognize the time of God's coming to you."
The unwillingness comes from not allowing the faithful to come together, not rejecting an offer of salvation.
Wow. This is going to bring destruction upon the entire city. (This is sarcasm).
Those Christ would gather are not represented as being unwilling, but not allowed by the ruling class in Jerusalem.
Bottomline JM: Why would you weep over something that was within your power to change. According to Calvinism, He could have made the leaders willing, and allowed the believers to gather, and have prevented the “children” from being dashed to the ground – However, He opted not to do so (according to His good pleasure).
Of course the leaders rejected the prophets! Because God didn't enable them to receive the prophets with the ability to respond! According to Calvinism, the Spirit first has to regenerate them! And, did He really attempt to gather the believers but failed at the attempts due to the unwillingness of the leaders? Or, was it all just a big charade?
Maybe you think Jesus’ tears were tears of joy at the secret will of the Father being demonstrated in the rebelliousness of unwilling fallen leaders keeping the believers from being gathered - how wonderful?
