My thoughts around Romans 9

[Presbyterian Continuist]

Okay, yet this is about Romans 9. Understanding Romans 9 is vital to believing in the True Jesus, the Doctrine of Christ. The True Jesus saves only those God has Sovereignly chose in Him before the foundation, the vessels of mercy Rom 9 speaks of. He didnt come to save the vessels of wrath Rom 9 speaks of. Is that the Jesus you believe in ?

The Jesus I know saves all who come to Him.

 

[rwe2156]

If God foreknows what decision I will happen, it HAS to happen, or God is not omniscient.

Whatever he foreknows is predetermined, or else God does not have foreknowledge, right?

How does that fit into my free will? From the human perspective I freely chose that which I desire at that moment, for that instance. But, that choice was predetermined and had to happen if God foreknew it would happen. Does that mean I don't have free will? No!

That does not mean the foreknowledge view of election is valid (that election is based on God's foreknowledge of a human decision), and Paul essentially destroys it in Rom 9.

This all starts with understanding man's fallen nature, and the no man CAN come to him unless it is granted by the Father - that is an ABILITY, which an unregenerate heart does not have.

I truly believe if more people understood what was behind their decision, many more people would realize they have a counterfeit salvation based on an "altar call" or a "testimony".

 

[bling]

If God foreknows what decision I will happen, it HAS to happen, or God is not omniscient.

Whatever he foreknows is predetermined, or else God does not have foreknowledge, right?

How does that fit into my free will? From the human perspective I freely chose that which I desire at that moment, for that instance. But, that choice was predetermined and had to happen if God foreknew it would happen. Does that mean I don't have free will? No!

That does not mean the foreknowledge view of election is valid (that election is based on God's foreknowledge of a human decision), and Paul essentially destroys it in Rom 9.

This all starts with understanding man's fallen nature, and the no man CAN come to him unless it is granted by the Father - that is an ABILITY, which an unregenerate heart does not have.

I truly believe if more people understood what was behind their decision, many more people would realize they have a counterfeit salvation based on an "altar call" or a "testimony".

“How does God know miraculously the future perfectly?”

Think about this: If I know perfectly a truly free will choice you made yesterday that choice is fixed and cannot be changed since it is history. The fact I know your free will choice of yesterday, does not keep it from being a free will choice.

History cannot be changed even if God was the only one to know about something that has happened, since it still happened. Since God does everything right perfectly the first time, there is no reason to do it over again.

God is outside of time and omnipresent throughout time, so God at the end of time knows everything historically that has happened throughout time, making it unchangeable (fixed). Yet again just because God at the end of time knows all things that happened throughout time perfectly, does not mean human autonomous free will choice could not have been made.

God at the end of time is the same God existing within Himself at the beginning of time and thus God has historically all the foreknowledge of what happened throughout time, but again that does not mean humans could not have made autonomous free will choices.

God did not present this miraculous method of “how” He knows the future, but that is not unusual and communicates to man from man’s perspective is also God’s way.

There are other ways God can know stuff, but He is outside of time, so He also knows everything historically throughout time?

God is very much interacting with humans, but knows everything that has happened already in the future as pure unchangeable history. It is like God at the end of time sends all human history back to himself at the beginning of time, it is information and not like God is living it twice or constantly.

Jesus knew when He was teaching His disciple, what He would be going through on the cross as pure history, but that does not mean He was on the cross constantly.

To better address your question: If God decides to never ever create a person, then God knows exactly what that person did in the future, which is nothing, but God would not know any history of what that person did, since that person has no history (he/she never was a person and made no free will choices).

 

[zoidar]

Okay, yet this is about Romans 9. Understanding Romans 9 is vital to believing in the True Jesus, the Doctrine of Christ. The True Jesus saves only those God has Sovereignly chose in Him before the foundation, the vessels of mercy Rom 9 speaks of. He didnt come to save the vessels of wrath Rom 9 speaks of. Is that the Jesus you believe in ?

Being born again is vital of believing in the true Jesus.

 

[Brightfame52]

The Jesus I know saves all who come to Him.

The Jesus I know, the people that come to Him are His Sheep, and He died specifically for them, thats why they come to Him. Also God determined it. The ones that dont come to Jesus, God determined that as well, and Christ didnt die for them !

 

[Brightfame52]

Being born again is vital of believing in the true Jesus.

Of course one must be born again in order to believe the true Gospel. Nevertheless thats all determined by God, who will be born again and believe, and who wont be. Rom 9

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

The Jesus I know, the people that come to Him are His Sheep, and He died specifically for them, thats why they come to Him. Also God determined it. The ones that dont come to Jesus, God determined that as well, and Christ didnt die for them !

The Bible is available to all. God's plan of salvation is in the Bible, The invitation to believe the Gospel is given to all. Therefore if people reject it and perish as a result, they will have no one to blame but themselves. If that wasn't the case, then there would be no judgment for them, because there would be no personal accounting. The Scripture says that we must all give an account of ourselves to God. If God predetermined people to be lost without the opportunity of choice, then they can't be judged. A person can't be judged guilty if they had no choice, so a reprobate person would have a watertight defence in the judgment. But the reality is that the reprobate will have no excuse because they have heard the Gospel, receive the invitation to receive salvation. The Scripture says, "How shall they escape if they ignore so great a salvation?"

It shows that Scripture interprets Scripture, therefore one cannot take a random verse out of context and make a doctrine out of it.

 

[FutureAndAHope]

Yes thats exactly what Romans 9 is about, thats why Paul anticipates the carnal objection that God seems unfair Rom 9:14,19

14 What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid.

19 Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will?

It really depends on how Paul was understanding this. The previous scripture to verse 19 was:

Rom 9:18 Therefore He has mercy on whom He wills, and whom He wills He hardens.​

We know that God has mercy on those who are of the family of faith, typified by Jacob. But we do know that God blinds sinners.

2Th 2:11-12 And for this reason God will send them strong delusion, that they should believe the lie, that they all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness.
​

But based upon whether they act righteously or unrighteously.

Joh 14:21-24 He who has My commandments and keeps them, it is he who loves Me. And he who loves Me will be loved by My Father, and I will love him and manifest Myself to him." Judas (not Iscariot) said to Him, "Lord, how is it that You will manifest Yourself to us, and not to the world?" Jesus answered and said to him, "If anyone loves Me, he will keep My word; and My Father will love him, and We will come to him and make Our home with him. He who does not love Me does not keep My words; and the word which you hear is not Mine but the Father's who sent Me.​

The Early Church Fathers likened this to self-blinding.

Iranaeus - Against Heresies - Book 4 Ch 39-End​

4. But God, foreknowing all things, prepared fit habitations for both, kindly conferring that light which they desire on those who seek after the light of incorruption, and resort to it; but for the despisers and mockers who avoid and turn themselves away from this light, and who do, as it were, blind themselves, He has prepared darkness suitable to persons who oppose the light, and He has inflicted an appropriate punishment upon those who try to avoid being subject to Him. Submission to God is eternal rest, so that they who shun the light have a place worthy of their flight; and those who fly from eternal rest, have a habitation in accordance with their fleeing. Now, since all good things are with God, they who by their own determination fly from God, do defraud themselves of all good things; and having been [thus] defrauded of all good things with respect to God, they shall consequently fall under the just judgment of God.
​

Paul can be referring to this blinding when saying "why does he find fault [when God causes blindness]"

The real point we need to look at is whether the story of Jacob and Esau is speaking of individuals and how God saves them. Or that speaking of the symbolism of faith-based salvation, verses works, and the rest. Iranaeus, thought it to be symbolic, speaking of two nations.

Irenaeus Against Heresies. (Cont.)

Book IV. (Cont.)

Chap. XXI. — Abraham’s Faith Was Identical with Ours; This Faith Was Prefigured by the Words and Actions of the Old Patriarchs.

The history of Isaac, too, is not without a symbolical character ... From which it is evident, that not only [were there] prophecies of the patriarchs, but also that the children brought forth by Rebecca were a prediction of the two nations; and that the one should be indeed the greater, but the other the less; that the one also should be under bondage, but the other free; but [that both should be] of one and the same father. Our God, one and the same, is also their God
​

There is much symbolism in the story. As I mentioned in the OP:

The picture of two nations refers to the promise of where faith is found. As Jacob stole the birthright off his brother, by the will of God. So too did the Church, and Gentiles gain the birthright, although it was originally in the hands of the Jewish nation. We see here the picture of two nations reflecting where salvation occurs, by faith, not by works of the Jewish law.​

The following verse need not be talking about individual salvation, but further symbolism in the story of the two sons:

Rom 9:11 (for the children not yet being born, nor having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works but of Him who calls),
​

For we know:

Gal 5:13 For you, brethren, have been called to liberty; only do not use liberty as an opportunity for the flesh, but through love serve one another.
​

We see God calls us via faith, not works, He elects faith as salvations method. He calls us to liberty. If Paul is expounding the symbolism of the passage, and its connection to how a person is saved, not by his works but by faith. It need not be speaking of salvation planned before we were born. For it may not be speaking of individuals.

 

[FutureAndAHope]

I believe there is good support for the idea that …

Rom 9:11 (for the children not yet being born, nor having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works but of Him who calls),​

… is further expounding on the symbolism of faith expressed in the lives of Jacob and Esau. Why do I say that? Due to the term:

not of works​

When looking at this term, it either means, the story of Jacob, is a picture of how faith works. Which is:

Gal 5:13 For you, brethren, have been called to liberty; only do not use liberty as an opportunity for the flesh, but through love serve one another.​

We know that the understanding of grace in scripture, is we are not saved by our works but by our faith in the death and resurrection of Christ.

Gal 2:21 I do not set aside the grace of God; for if righteousness comes through the law, then Christ died in vain."​

So why am I banging on about grace? Well, Paul most likely was referring to this kind of grace, unmerited favor. Symbolized in the story of Jacob and Esau.


Otherwise, we are changing the meaning of the term “not by works”, to mean something entirely different to grace. The idea that God selects people before they have done either good or evil, is a different doctrine to grace as shown in the scriptures above. Which goes against Paul's saying there is no partiality with God, and that we are judged according to our deeds.

Rom 2:4-11 Or do you despise the riches of His goodness, forbearance, and longsuffering, not knowing that the goodness of God leads you to repentance? But in accordance with your hardness and your impenitent heart you are treasuring up for yourself wrath in the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God, who "WILL RENDER TO EACH ONE ACCORDING TO HIS DEEDS": eternal life to those who by patient continuance in doing good seek for glory, honor, and immortality; but to those who are self-seeking and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness—indignation and wrath, tribulation and anguish, on every soul of man who does evil, of the Jew first and also of the Greek; but glory, honor, and peace to everyone who works what is good, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. For there is no partiality with God.
​

I think the fact that deeds are either worthy of merit or not is important:

Justin Martyr - First Apology - Ch 26-50​

Chap. XLIII — Responsibility Asserted.​

But lest some suppose, from what has been said by us, that we say that whatever happens, happens by a fatal necessity, because it is foretold as known beforehand, this too we explain. We have learned from the prophets, and we hold it to be true, that punishments, and chastisements, and good rewards, are rendered according to the merit of each man’s actions. Since if it be not so, but all things happen by fate, neither is anything at all in our own power. For if it be fated that this man, e.g., be good, and this other evil, neither is the former meritorious nor the latter to be blamed. And again, unless the human race have the power of avoiding evil and choosing good by free choice, they are not accountable for their actions, of whatever kind they be. But that it is by free choice they both walk uprightly and stumble, we thus demonstrate. We see the same man making a transition to opposite things. Now, if it had been fated that he were to be either good or bad, he could never have been capable of both the opposites, nor of so many transitions. But not even would some be good and others bad, since we thus make fate the cause of evil, and exhibit her as acting in opposition to herself; or that which has been already stated would seem to be true, that neither virtue nor vice is anything, but that things are only reckoned good or evil by opinion; which, as the true word shows, is the greatest impiety and wickedness. But this we assert is inevitable fate, that they who choose the good have worthy rewards, and they who choose the opposite have their merited awards. For not like other things, as trees and quadrupeds, which cannot act by choice, did God make man: for neither would he be worthy of reward or praise did he not of himself choose the good, but were created for this end; nor, if he were evil, would he be worthy of punishment, not being evil of himself, but being able to be nothing else than what he was made.​

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

I believe there is good support for the idea that …

Rom 9:11 (for the children not yet being born, nor having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works but of Him who calls),​

… is further expounding on the symbolism of faith expressed in the lives of Jacob and Esau. Why do I say that? Due to the term:

not of works​

When looking at this term, it either means, the story of Jacob, is a picture of how faith works. Which is:

Gal 5:13 For you, brethren, have been called to liberty; only do not use liberty as an opportunity for the flesh, but through love serve one another.​

We know that the understanding of grace in scripture, is we are not saved by our works but by our faith in the death and resurrection of Christ.

Gal 2:21 I do not set aside the grace of God; for if righteousness comes through the law, then Christ died in vain."​

So why am I banging on about grace? Well, Paul most likely was referring to this kind of grace, unmerited favor. Symbolized in the story of Jacob and Esau.


Otherwise, we are changing the meaning of the term “not by works”, to mean something entirely different to grace. The idea that God selects people before they have done either good or evil, is a different doctrine to grace as shown in the scriptures above. Which goes against Paul's saying there is no partiality with God, and that we are judged according to our deeds.

Rom 2:4-11 Or do you despise the riches of His goodness, forbearance, and longsuffering, not knowing that the goodness of God leads you to repentance? But in accordance with your hardness and your impenitent heart you are treasuring up for yourself wrath in the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God, who "WILL RENDER TO EACH ONE ACCORDING TO HIS DEEDS": eternal life to those who by patient continuance in doing good seek for glory, honor, and immortality; but to those who are self-seeking and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness—indignation and wrath, tribulation and anguish, on every soul of man who does evil, of the Jew first and also of the Greek; but glory, honor, and peace to everyone who works what is good, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. For there is no partiality with God.
​

I think the fact that deeds are either worthy of merit or not is important:

Justin Martyr - First Apology - Ch 26-50​

Chap. XLIII — Responsibility Asserted.​

But lest some suppose, from what has been said by us, that we say that whatever happens, happens by a fatal necessity, because it is foretold as known beforehand, this too we explain. We have learned from the prophets, and we hold it to be true, that punishments, and chastisements, and good rewards, are rendered according to the merit of each man’s actions. Since if it be not so, but all things happen by fate, neither is anything at all in our own power. For if it be fated that this man, e.g., be good, and this other evil, neither is the former meritorious nor the latter to be blamed. And again, unless the human race have the power of avoiding evil and choosing good by free choice, they are not accountable for their actions, of whatever kind they be. But that it is by free choice they both walk uprightly and stumble, we thus demonstrate. We see the same man making a transition to opposite things. Now, if it had been fated that he were to be either good or bad, he could never have been capable of both the opposites, nor of so many transitions. But not even would some be good and others bad, since we thus make fate the cause of evil, and exhibit her as acting in opposition to herself; or that which has been already stated would seem to be true, that neither virtue nor vice is anything, but that things are only reckoned good or evil by opinion; which, as the true word shows, is the greatest impiety and wickedness. But this we assert is inevitable fate, that they who choose the good have worthy rewards, and they who choose the opposite have their merited awards. For not like other things, as trees and quadrupeds, which cannot act by choice, did God make man: for neither would he be worthy of reward or praise did he not of himself choose the good, but were created for this end; nor, if he were evil, would he be worthy of punishment, not being evil of himself, but being able to be nothing else than what he was made.​

There is a misunderstanding that is resolved by an accurate exegesis of the text. "Esau have I hated, Jacob have I loved" does not stand for Esau and Jacob as persons. They stand for their descendants, that the stream of God's plan of salvation came through Jacob, resulting in the nation of Israel, while the descendants of Esau formed pagan nations. There is no evidence that Esau was not personally saved, and that all that happened to him as that he lost his birthright after trading it away to Jacob for a pot of stew. Whether Esau lived a life of faith in the Messiah to come is not known because the Bible doesn't tell us. We also don't know whether God hated Esau personally. The sense of the text is that in relation to the line of His plan of salvation, God turned away from Esau's line in favour of Jacob's.

 

[Brightfame52]

The Bible is available to all. God's plan of salvation is in the Bible, The invitation to believe the Gospel is given to all. Therefore if people reject it and perish as a result, they will have no one to blame but themselves. If that wasn't the case, then there would be no judgment for them, because there would be no personal accounting. The Scripture says that we must all give an account of ourselves to God. If God predetermined people to be lost without the opportunity of choice, then they can't be judged. A person can't be judged guilty if they had no choice, so a reprobate person would have a watertight defence in the judgment. But the reality is that the reprobate will have no excuse because they have heard the Gospel, receive the invitation to receive salvation. The Scripture says, "How shall they escape if they ignore so great a salvation?"

It shows that Scripture interprets Scripture, therefore one cannot take a random verse out of context and make a doctrine out of it.

Yeah the bible is available to all, but that means nothing. Sure the Gospel is preached to all, no argument. Everyone will be accountable for the Gospel, for instance, if one rejects Rom 9 and how its a testimony of how God saves sinners, according to His Sovereign Will, and that He damns sinners according to His Sovereign Will, and that He predetermined who would be vessels of His saving Mercy, as well as who would be vessels of His wrath, fitted for destruction, they will be accountable because they are calling God a liar in regards to the Testimony of the Gospel.

BTW Man has no choice whether he is a guilty sinner or not, and guilty before God Rom 3:19

Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God.

 

[Brightfame52]

It really depends on how Paul was understanding this. The previous scripture to verse 19 was:

Rom 9:18 Therefore He has mercy on whom He wills, and whom He wills He hardens.​

We know that God has mercy on those who are of the family of faith, typified by Jacob. But we do know that God blinds sinners.

2Th 2:11-12 And for this reason God will send them strong delusion, that they should believe the lie, that they all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness.
​

But based upon whether they act righteously or unrighteously.

Joh 14:21-24 He who has My commandments and keeps them, it is he who loves Me. And he who loves Me will be loved by My Father, and I will love him and manifest Myself to him." Judas (not Iscariot) said to Him, "Lord, how is it that You will manifest Yourself to us, and not to the world?" Jesus answered and said to him, "If anyone loves Me, he will keep My word; and My Father will love him, and We will come to him and make Our home with him. He who does not love Me does not keep My words; and the word which you hear is not Mine but the Father's who sent Me.​

The Early Church Fathers likened this to self-blinding.

Iranaeus - Against Heresies - Book 4 Ch 39-End​

4. But God, foreknowing all things, prepared fit habitations for both, kindly conferring that light which they desire on those who seek after the light of incorruption, and resort to it; but for the despisers and mockers who avoid and turn themselves away from this light, and who do, as it were, blind themselves, He has prepared darkness suitable to persons who oppose the light, and He has inflicted an appropriate punishment upon those who try to avoid being subject to Him. Submission to God is eternal rest, so that they who shun the light have a place worthy of their flight; and those who fly from eternal rest, have a habitation in accordance with their fleeing. Now, since all good things are with God, they who by their own determination fly from God, do defraud themselves of all good things; and having been [thus] defrauded of all good things with respect to God, they shall consequently fall under the just judgment of God.
​

Paul can be referring to this blinding when saying "why does he find fault [when God causes blindness]"

The real point we need to look at is whether the story of Jacob and Esau is speaking of individuals and how God saves them. Or that speaking of the symbolism of faith-based salvation, verses works, and the rest. Iranaeus, thought it to be symbolic, speaking of two nations.

Irenaeus Against Heresies. (Cont.)

Book IV. (Cont.)

Chap. XXI. — Abraham’s Faith Was Identical with Ours; This Faith Was Prefigured by the Words and Actions of the Old Patriarchs.

The history of Isaac, too, is not without a symbolical character ... From which it is evident, that not only [were there] prophecies of the patriarchs, but also that the children brought forth by Rebecca were a prediction of the two nations; and that the one should be indeed the greater, but the other the less; that the one also should be under bondage, but the other free; but [that both should be] of one and the same father. Our God, one and the same, is also their God
​

There is much symbolism in the story. As I mentioned in the OP:

The picture of two nations refers to the promise of where faith is found. As Jacob stole the birthright off his brother, by the will of God. So too did the Church, and Gentiles gain the birthright, although it was originally in the hands of the Jewish nation. We see here the picture of two nations reflecting where salvation occurs, by faith, not by works of the Jewish law.​

The following verse need not be talking about individual salvation, but further symbolism in the story of the two sons:

Rom 9:11 (for the children not yet being born, nor having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works but of Him who calls),
​

For we know:

Gal 5:13 For you, brethren, have been called to liberty; only do not use liberty as an opportunity for the flesh, but through love serve one another.
​

We see God calls us via faith, not works, He elects faith as salvations method. He calls us to liberty. If Paul is expounding the symbolism of the passage, and its connection to how a person is saved, not by his works but by faith. It need not be speaking of salvation planned before we were born. For it may not be speaking of individuals.

Paul understood it the way its written, God is sovereign in who goes to heaven and who goes to hell, He determined that when He made each group of people. All of Romans 9 is about Salvation, even Individual Salvation. Notice Paul uses the singular for vessel Rom 9:21

21 Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?

Just like Paul was One chosen Vessel plural Acts 9:11
But the Lord said unto him, Go thy way: for he is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear my name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel:

Paul was a chosen vessel of mercy !

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

Yeah the bible is available to all, but that means nothing. Sure the Gospel is preached to all, no argument. Everyone will be accountable for the Gospel, for instance, if one rejects Rom 9 and how its a testimony of how God saves sinners, according to His Sovereign Will, and that He damns sinners according to His Sovereign Will, and that He predetermined who would be vessels of His saving Mercy, as well as who would be vessels of His wrath, fitted for destruction, they will be accountable because they are calling God a liar in regards to the Testimony of the Gospel.

BTW Man has no choice whether he is a guilty sinner or not, and guilty before God Rom 3:19

Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God.

The question is, if there are reprobates who are condemned no matter what they do, though a secret decree of God, then how do you know you are really saved, because in spite of your Christian profession, God might have decreed that you are reprobate and your faith is ineffective. Isn't that how you are interpreting Romans 9? It is a fact that many in the church think they are saved when they are not. See the Scripture: "There will be many who will say, "Lord, Lord"...etc. But Jesus will say, "I never knew you. Depart from Me you workers of iniquity".

 

[Brightfame52]

The question is, if there are reprobates who are condemned no matter what they do, though a secret decree of God, then how do you know you are really saved, because in spite of your Christian profession, God might have decreed that you are reprobate and your faith is ineffective. Isn't that how you are interpreting Romans 9? It is a fact that many in the church think they are saved when they are not. See the Scripture: "There will be many who will say, "Lord, Lord"...etc. But Jesus will say, "I never knew you. Depart from Me you workers of iniquity".

Many who now believe they are saved will find out in that great day that they are workers of iniquity and were never loved by Christ Matt 7:22-23

22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?

23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

These are they who Rom 9 calls vessels of wrath being fitted for destruction. God created them for this purpose.

 

[zoidar]

.

 

[FutureAndAHope]

The Jesus I know, the people that come to Him are His Sheep, and He died specifically for them, thats why they come to Him. Also God determined it. The ones that dont come to Jesus, God determined that as well, and Christ didnt die for them !

This all starts with understanding man's fallen nature, and the no man CAN come to him unless it is granted by the Father - that is an ABILITY, which an unregenerate heart does not have.

But the Bible shows us who Jesus' sheep are, and to whom does the Father draw? How does He call?

Joh 14:21-24 He who has My commandments and keeps them, it is he who loves Me. And he who loves Me will be loved by My Father, and I will love him and manifest Myself to him." Judas (not Iscariot) said to Him, "Lord, how is it that You will manifest Yourself to us, and not to the world?" Jesus answered and said to him, "If anyone loves Me, he will keep My word; and My Father will love him, and We will come to him and make Our home with him. He who does not love Me does not keep My words; and the word which you hear is not Mine but the Father's who sent Me.
​

Obedience, and receiving the light that God gives leads to the Fathers "choosing". To whom does God give light?

John 1:9 That was the true Light which gives light to every man coming into the world.​

 

[Mark Quayle]

But the Bible shows us who Jesus' sheep are, and to whom does the Father draw? How does He call?

Joh 14:21-24 He who has My commandments and keeps them, it is he who loves Me. And he who loves Me will be loved by My Father, and I will love him and manifest Myself to him." Judas (not Iscariot) said to Him, "Lord, how is it that You will manifest Yourself to us, and not to the world?" Jesus answered and said to him, "If anyone loves Me, he will keep My word; and My Father will love him, and We will come to him and make Our home with him. He who does not love Me does not keep My words; and the word which you hear is not Mine but the Father's who sent Me.
​

Obedience, and receiving the light that God gives leads to the Fathers "choosing". To whom does God give light?

John 1:9 That was the true Light which gives light to every man coming into the world.​

And thus you designate cause and effect then?

By the way, God does give light to every man. And so they are without excuse. But information does not save.

 

[FutureAndAHope]

And thus you designate cause and effect then?

By the way, God does give light to every man. And so they are without excuse. But information does not save.

I am not sure I understand your lingo? What do you mean by "I designate case and effect"?

The scripture shows the "choosing of God" follows our love for God and His word. For He says "and I will love him, and Manifest myself to him".

 

[Brightfame52]

But the Bible shows us who Jesus' sheep are, and to whom does the Father draw? How does He call?

Joh 14:21-24 He who has My commandments and keeps them, it is he who loves Me. And he who loves Me will be loved by My Father, and I will love him and manifest Myself to him." Judas (not Iscariot) said to Him, "Lord, how is it that You will manifest Yourself to us, and not to the world?" Jesus answered and said to him, "If anyone loves Me, he will keep My word; and My Father will love him, and We will come to him and make Our home with him. He who does not love Me does not keep My words; and the word which you hear is not Mine but the Father's who sent Me.
​

Obedience, and receiving the light that God gives leads to the Fathers "choosing". To whom does God give light?

John 1:9 That was the true Light which gives light to every man coming into the world.​

You teach conditional salvation based on man, far from what Romans 9 teaches, that Salvation is conditioned on the Sovereign Will of God before the persons were ever born to do good or evil.

 

[BBAS 64]

You don't get the point of what I was saying. I do believe God blinds people, but only after they refuse the "love of the truth". What your doctrine states, is God because of his wrath against the sinner, keeps the majority of people blind to the truth, only enlightening a select few. According to your doctrine states, it is His plan. Yet we see Jesus said His desire was to gather them all, but they refused, were unwilling. Is God unable to perform what he willed?

Luke 13:34 "O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the one who kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to her! How often I wanted to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her brood under her wings, but you were not willing!

Is it not the case they had free will.

Good Day, Futureandhope

So glad you have gotten back to this...

To pick it back up you in understanding this verse think:

Jerusalem = the city
The Children of Jerusalem = the people who live in the city
You also conceded in the pasty that a city does not have free will.

So when you say:

Is it not the case they had free will.

The pronoun "they" you use refers to whom/what?

In Him,

Bill