This sounds like a commentary.Jesus said belief was itself a work. If we can't be saved by works, then we can't be saved. Peter on the day of Pentecost when asked, "what must we do?" commanded repentance and baptism.
You and I should have a conversation about what "literal" and "figurative" means.This isn't taught in scripture. You literally want to divorce things that God said were joined. Water and spirit, belief and baptism. You'll have to work that out with God.
I call your attention this:
[Gen 3:22 NASB] 22 Then the LORD God said, "Behold, the man has become like one of Us, knowing good and evil; and now, he might stretch out his hand, and take also from the tree of life, and eat, and live forever"--
In the verse you give from Romans 8, [reference inserted for clarity]
For those who live according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who live according to the Spirit set their minds on the things of the Spirit. For to set the mind on the flesh is death, but to set the mind on the Spirit is life and peace. For the mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God, for it does not submit to God’s law; indeed, it cannot. Those who are in the flesh cannot please God. – Romans 8:5-8
we see just prior (in red above) that we can set our minds on the things of the spirit for a better experience. The following verse doesn't exclude the ability to set our minds on good, it just says those who's mind set is on the flesh are not able to set their minds on good. But it just got done saying (twice) that those who set their minds on the things of the spirit are able to do good.
Combine this with what Romans 2 says:
[Rom 2:14-15 NASB] 14 For when Gentiles who do not have the Law do instinctively the things of the Law, these, not having the Law, are a law to themselves, 15 in that they show the work of the Law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness and their thoughts alternately accusing or else defending them,
So the unbeliever is able to know good, and is able to set their minds on good, and have God's good law on their heart. Sounds like men are not as depraved as is suspected. Additionally, Able was never made righteous, nor regenerated, yet unlike Cain his faithful offering was pleasing to God.
But the Bible has a whole chapter that deals with Calvinism in a direct way. It is all but ignored.
[Deu 30:1, 6, 11-15, 19 NASB] 1 "So it shall be when all of these things have come upon you, the blessing and the curse which I have set before you, and you call [them] to mind in all nations where the LORD your God has banished you, ... 6 "Moreover the LORD your God will circumcise your heart and the heart of your descendants, to love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul, so that you may live. ... 11 "For this commandment which I command you today is not too difficult for you, nor is it out of reach. 12 "It is not in heaven, that you should say, 'Who will go up to heaven for us to get it for us and make us hear it, that we may observe it?' 13 "Nor is it beyond the sea, that you should say, 'Who will cross the sea for us to get it for us and make us hear it, that we may observe it?' 14 "But the word is very near you, in your mouth and in your heart, that you may observe it. 15 "See, I have set before you today life and prosperity, and death and adversity; ... 19 "I call heaven and earth to witness against you today, that I have set before you life and death, the blessing and the curse. So choose life in order that you may live, you and your descendants,
What does this passage say? 3 times it tells us life and death are a choice God sets before man (and tells us to choose). It says this command is not too difficult for us, nor out of our reach (there goes Total Depravity). It says this decision is NOT made in heaven. It even goes so far as to say we don't need anyone to go get it for us or hear it for us (another common claim of Calvinists).
The only argument Calvinists can make against this passage is that it is part of the law and doesn't refer to salvation by faith (only applies to Israel). But thankfully, Paul sets the record straight:
[Rom 10:5-11 NASB] 5 For Moses writes that the man who practices the righteousness which is based on law shall live by that righteousness. 6 But the righteousness based on faith speaks as follows: "DO NOT SAY IN YOUR HEART, 'WHO WILL ASCEND INTO HEAVEN?' (that is, to bring Christ down), 7 or 'WHO WILL DESCEND INTO THE ABYSS?' (that is, to bring Christ up from the dead)." 8 But what does it say? "THE WORD IS NEAR YOU, IN YOUR MOUTH AND IN YOUR HEART"--that is, the word of faith which we are preaching, 9 that if you confess with your mouth Jesus [as] Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved; 10 for with the heart a person believes, resulting in righteousness, and with the mouth he confesses, resulting in salvation. 11 For the Scripture says, "WHOEVER BELIEVES IN HIM WILL NOT BE DISAPPOINTED."
Here we see Paul quote heavily from Deuteronomy 30 and say "the righteousness based on faith says it like this." Paul says DONT EVEN SAY in your heart that man is too depraved to believe for himself!! A direct command from Paul not to believe in the ideals of calvinism.
The next time you hear a calvinist or reformed theologian say you need the Holy Spirit to enable you to hear the gospel, think of Deuteronomy 30 and Romans 10 where it says DO NOT EVEN SAY that in your heart! It is not too difficult for us to make the choice, the choice is not out of our reach. It is near to us.
Finally, have a look at Deuteronomy 30:19. This is the Bible's statement on synergism vs monergism.
19 "I call heaven and earth to witness against you today, that I have set before you life and death, the blessing and the curse. So choose life in order that you may live, you and your descendants,
"I call Heaven (God) and earth (man) to witness..." This mirrors what Paul says in Romans 8:
[Rom 8:16 NASB] 16 The Spirit Himself testifies with our spirit that we are children of God,
Here we see that The Spirit (Heaven) and our spirit (earth) testifies (bares witness) to the choice we make for blessing or cursing, life or death.
I agree with your statement that God circumcising their heart is the pivotal verse for understanding Deuteronomy 30.It would take quite some time to walk through these passages, as admittedly I am less familiar with them than others. In its broader context, Deuteronomy 30 is set in covenantal language which begins in chapter 29. Moses is enjoining the people to keep the words of the covenant lest they be cursed. But notice Moses’ words early in chapter 29 when he states that
…the LORD has not given you a heart to understand or eyes to see or ears to hear. – Deuteronomy 29:4 (ESV)
Left in this state the Israelites would be utterly hopeless. However, in the beginning of chapter 30 we see that the Lord promises to enable his covenant people to love him, and thereby obey him, in order to receive the promises.
And the LORD your God will circumcise your heart and the heart of your offspring, so that you will love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul, that you may live. – Deuteronomy 30:6 (ESV)
This I believe is a pivotal verse for understanding the remaining text, in which Moses exhorts the people to choose life.
“See, I have set before you today life and good, death and evil. If you obey the commandments of the LORD your God that I command you today, by loving the LORD your God, by walking in his ways, and by keeping his commandments and his statutes and his rules, then you shall live and multiply, and the LORD your God will bless you in the land that you are entering to take possession of it. But if your heart turns away, and you will not hear, but are drawn away to worship other gods and serve them, I declare to you today, that you shall surely perish. You shall not live long in the land that you are going over the Jordan to enter and possess. I call heaven and earth to witness against you today, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and curse. Therefore choose life, that you and your offspring may live, loving the LORD your God, obeying his voice and holding fast to him, for he is your life and length of days, that you may dwell in the land that the LORD swore to your fathers, to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, to give them.” – Deuteronomy 30:15-20 (ESV)
If choosing life is entwined with loving the Lord, and loving the Lord is consequent to God’s circumcising the heart, then it seems to follow that both the command of God and the ability to keep that command are supplied according to his grace. I believe that Paul's reference to Deuteronomy 30:1-6 in Romans 10:5-10 shows us that the message of salvation was proclaimed to the Israelites by the Word of Faith being brought near to them, and this by divine grace rather than by the efforts of men (e.g., ascending, descending). Paul then applies that concept to the saints in Rome, explaining to them that salvation is through faith in Christ and that the means of God's redeeming work is the proclamation of the Gospel (v14).
I know there is a lot here. I apologize if I missed some of your points, but I hope this fleshes out some of my previous arguments.
For it has been granted to you that for the sake of Christ you should not only believe in him but also suffer for his sake, engaged in the same conflict that you saw I had and now hear that I still have.
I like the way you're formatting this. Makes it easy to respond to.
So, I do not read this as God causing us to do anything but here is saying that what we've been given, what we should do are two things. Believe and suffer for his sake. This means that we give up that which pleased us, sometimes put up with persecution and obey his commands.
And in this case our "should" is "for the sake of Christ." The word "grant" there can also be translated "given." Commands are given. Responsibilities are given. This isn't magic power he's talking about but the "perfect law of liberty." It's up to us to obey it.
And the elect, the chosen, are those who obey the gospel call. They are not pre-selected outside of God's foreknowledge.
Here's where I think we may disagree. You say that those who are "fallen in Adam" are born that way right? I don't believe we're born that way. Even this passage is letting us know that to set one's mind on the flesh is not a result of a man's birth condition but the choices he makes to set his own mind on the flesh and live according to the flesh. A mind set on the flesh - a man's own rules and desires - cannot submit itself to God because the man in control of that mind has chosen himself as king rather than God.
Of course. It's impossible not to. So wouldn't it be weird if faith was something God supplied or withheld arbitrarily?
The word repent, is a turning of the mind from one idea to another. In this case, sin. People are saved because they, just as Paul describes is necessary for us to do, renew our minds and turn to God as our Lord rather than our flesh. Obeying the flesh produces sin. Obeying God produces righteousness. The righteousness that he has defined, not that we have defined for ourselves.
The faith - the gospel is a gift from God. Our faith or belief, is a commandment given by God. They aren't the same thing. The faith we are to demonstrate is not the same as the system of faith that we are to obey.
Well, this assertion is an attempt to explain the HOW of the gospel's mechanisms without the benefit of any actual verbiage in the text that explicitly tells us that this is how it works. It is a conclusion drawn from what is written that I don't believe is actually implied by the text.
When God had Ezekiel prophecy that he would give us hearts of flesh rather than stone, I believe we actually see the greatest example of how he would accomplish that on the day of Pentecost and it wasn't as you describe. The means by which he softened the hearts of those Jewish people on the Day of Pentecost was not through the use of the Holy Spirit literally himself changing the nature of the listener but by delivering the words through the mouths of his chosen prophets to speak to the people.
It was the words which convinced those standing there that they had indeed made a mistake when they commended their Messiah into the "lawless hands" unto crucifixion.
36 “Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly that God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ.”
37 Now when they heard this, they were cut to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, “Men and brethren, what shall we do?”
And Paul confirms that this is the way it works in Romans.
14 How then shall they call on Him in whom they have not believed? And how shall they believe in Him of whom they have not heard? And how shall they hear without a preacher? 15 And how shall they preach unless they are sent? As it is written:
“How beautiful are the feet of those who preach the gospel of peace,
Who bring glad tidings of good things!”
16 But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Isaiah says, “Lord, who has believed our report?” 17 So then faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.
So, it is the word which will either soften or harden our hearts, words delivered by the Holy Spirit. The first thing, Paul says is we must hear. And it is our choice whether or not we accept the words we hear and give them the compassion they deserve. Those on the day of Pentecost heard the words that Peter taught and then believed and it was then that their hearts were exchanged, otherwise they could not have been cut. Stone won't do that. Their now softened hearts were open to the command that Peter would give them in response to their question "what must we do?"
Some standing there chose not to believe.
You and I should have a conversation about what "literal" and "figurative" means.
Al, thanks for being careful with the text! I think you make an astute observation; however, I believe that your interpretation is mistaken. The sense of “should” in Philippians 1:29 is not in this context indicating obligation, rather purpose. This can be seen if you consider the use of the word “that” earlier on.
The crux of the matter is that God can both command of us what we cannot do and provide the means to fulfill his command!
Al, when you say that you “don’t believe we’re born that way” in response to the quotation of Romans 8:5-8, are you saying that you do not believe that man is born incapacitated by sin to submit to the law of God?
I agree with your statement that God circumcising their heart is the pivotal verse for understanding Deuteronomy 30.
Circumcision is the foreshadow or placeholder for regeneration or the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. The quickening to life of the spirit. The righteous, living inner-man surrounded by dead and sinful outer flesh is an apt word picture for circumcision.
[Rom 2:28-29 NASB] 28 For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, nor is circumcision that which is outward in the flesh. 29 But he is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is that which is of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter; and his praise is not from men, but from God.
[Eph 1:13-14 NASB] 13 In Him, you also, after listening to the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation--having also believed, you were sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise, 14 who is given as a pledge of our inheritance, with a view to the redemption of [God's own] possession, to the praise of His glory.
[Rom 4:9-13 NASB] 9 Is this blessing then on the circumcised, or on the uncircumcised also? For we say, "FAITH WAS CREDITED TO ABRAHAM AS RIGHTEOUSNESS." 10 How then was it credited? While he was circumcised, or uncircumcised? Not while circumcised, but while uncircumcised; 11 and he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had while uncircumcised, so that he might be the father of all who believe without being circumcised, that righteousness might be credited to them, 12 and the father of circumcision to those who not only are of the circumcision, but who also follow in the steps of the faith of our father Abraham which he had while uncircumcised. 13 For the promise to Abraham or to his descendants that he would be heir of the world was not through the Law, but through the righteousness of faith.
So we see that for Abraham, circumcision was the seal of the righteousness of faith. Since Christ and the Holy Spirit have come, the Holy Spirit now takes His rightful place as the seal of the righteousness of faith. The pattern of Abraham remains consistent. The sequence is faith, then righteousness, then the Holy Spirit (circumcision of the heart). For Abraham was made righteous for his faith while uncircumcised, or before regeneration.
Gup, I am still learning the theology of the sacraments, so I appreciate your explanations here!
On my present view, circumcision was instituted as a sign and seal of God’s promises as you noted in Romans 4. It is a sign of the promises which are conferred to those who believe and a seal of those promises to those who do believe. However, outward circumcision never conferred the promises under its own power. It is altogether the Holy Spirit who works inwardly to circumcise the heart and seal it as God’s own. These acts are not necessarily coincident, as we see in the case of Abraham.
Abraham had faith and was counted righteous before he was circumcised in the flesh. He received the outward sign of circumcision as a seal of the righteousness he had already had by faith. From where did his faith come? My interpretation of Scripture is that faith is the work of the Spirit and that it is expressed by one whose heart has been quickened to spiritual life, which is to say, regenerated. This picture of the Spirit’s inward working was linked to the physical act of circumcision, so that the outward circumcision of the flesh pointed toward the promise of a new heart to those who believe (sign), and assured that reality to those for whom faith had been granted (seal). So then the sequence I see in Abraham’s account is:
spiritual circumcision (regeneration) > faith > righteousness > physical circumcision (sign and seal of the covenant)
My point is that, as the pattern for salvation, Abraham's account of righteousness before circumcision is powerful evidence that regeneration is not required for faith.Gup, I am still learning the theology of the sacraments, so I appreciate your explanations here!
On my present view, circumcision was instituted as a sign and seal of God’s promises as you noted in Romans 4. It is a sign of the promises which are conferred to those who believe and a seal of those promises to those who do believe. However, outward circumcision never conferred the promises under its own power. It is altogether the Holy Spirit who works inwardly to circumcise the heart and seal it as God’s own. These acts are not necessarily coincident, as we see in the case of Abraham.
Abraham had faith and was counted righteous before he was circumcised in the flesh. He received the outward sign of circumcision as a seal of the righteousness he had already had by faith. From where did his faith come? My interpretation of Scripture is that faith is the work of the Spirit and that it is expressed by one whose heart has been quickened to spiritual life, which is to say, regenerated. This picture of the Spirit’s inward working was linked to the physical act of circumcision, so that the outward circumcision of the flesh pointed toward the promise of a new heart to those who believe (sign), and assured that reality to those for whom faith had been granted (seal). So then the sequence I see in Abraham’s account is:
spiritual circumcision (regeneration) > faith > righteousness > physical circumcision (sign and seal of the covenant)
Jewish male children were (are still) circumcised on the eighth day after their birth. This sign and seal from God wasn't merely outward, but actually conveyed and conferred the covenant promise of God to that child.
-CryptoLutheran
[Deu 30:6 NASB] 6 "Moreover the LORD your God will circumcise your heart and the heart of your descendants, to love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul, so that you may live.
Even the Law of Moses says that it was always meant to transition from outward to inward circumcision.
As long as baptism, like circumcision, is internal I can accept what you've stated here. So then, we must look to scripture to see when and how righteousness and the regeneration of the Holy Spirit (spritual circumcision or baptism of the holy spirit) are applied:So where can we find the inward spiritual circumcision? Is it invisible, intangible? Or does God accomplish this in an objective, concrete way?
The answer is given to us by St. Paul in Colossians ch. 2,
"In Him also you were circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body of the flesh, by the circumcision of Christ, having been buried with Him in baptism, in which you were also raised with Him through faith in the powerful working of God, who raised Him from the dead." - Colossians 2:11-12
Our baptism is our spiritual circumcision. That which circumcision looked forward to is fulfilled in the Sacrament of Baptism. Whereby God Himself circumcises us inwardly by uniting us to Christ's death, burial, and resurrection.
-CryptoLutheran
As long as baptism, like circumcision, is internal I can accept what you've stated here. So then, we must look to scripture to see when and how righteousness and the regeneration of the Holy Spirit (spritual circumcision or baptism of the holy spirit) are applied:
[Deu 30:6 NASB] 6 "Moreover the LORD your God will circumcise your heart and the heart of your descendants, to love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul, so that you may live.
[Rom 4:11-15 NASB] 11 and he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had while uncircumcised, so that he might be the father of all who believe without being circumcised, that righteousness might be credited to them, 12 and the father of circumcision to those who not only are of the circumcision, but who also follow in the steps of the faith of our father Abraham which he had while uncircumcised. 13 For the promise to Abraham or to his descendants that he would be heir of the world was not through the Law, but through the righteousness of faith. 16 For this reason [it is] by faith, in order that [it may be] in accordance with grace, so that the promise will be guaranteed to all the descendants, not only to those who are of the Law, but also to those who are of the faith of Abraham, who is the father of us all, 17 (as it is written, "A FATHER OF MANY NATIONS HAVE I MADE YOU") in the presence of Him whom he believed, [even] God, who gives life to the dead and calls into being that which does not exist.
[Act 11:15-17 NASB] 15 "And as I began to speak, the Holy Spirit fell upon them just as [He did] upon us at the beginning. 16 "And I remembered the word of the Lord, how He used to say, 'John baptized with water, but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit.' 17 "Therefore if God gave to them the same gift as [He gave] to us also after believing in the Lord Jesus Christ, who was I that I could stand in God's way?"
Jewish male children were (are still) circumcised on the eighth day after their birth. This sign and seal from God wasn't merely outward, but actually conveyed and conferred the covenant promise of God to that child.
-CryptoLutheran
Show it to me in the prime salvation example of Abraham, and I'll consider it. We all become saved by having the same faith in the gospel that Abraham had while he was an uncircumcised gentile. I can accept that circumcision of the heart represents baptism of the Holy Spirit, and I see Biblical evidence for that. Show me where Abraham was physically baptized in water, and I'll accept that I must emulate that to be saved.You are insisting on a matter-spirit dualism, that physical, tangible things aren't God's work. But they are. Again, look at the Incarnation.
Baptism is God's work, yes it is a physical, tangible, material thing--we are brought to the water, and with the water the word of God is spoken, "in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit" and here in this water it is not mere water, but the word of God in connection with water. So that we are truly born again, the gift of the Spirit is ours, mystically united to Christ's death and His resurrection. We come to the water dead, and are afterward alive, as a new creation.
It's not physical vs non-physical; this dualistic thinking is antithetical to Christianity. God has always worked through Means, He has always used the physical world to accomplish His glorious purposes.
The Word became flesh.
God became man.
Christ was born of the Virgin Mary, He lived, suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, dead, buried, and rose from the dead. Ascended into heaven, and is seated at the right hand of the Father. He meets us in His Word and Sacraments. He meets us through the preaching of the Gospel. He meets us in the waters of Baptism. He meets us in the bread and wine of the Eucharist, His own very body and blood which is for us. Word and Sacrament, real, concrete, solid grace. Jesus Christ, the Incarnate God-Man. This is the work of the Spirit here, in the Church, for the world.
-CryptoLutheran
How can one enter that same covenant today which has been rendered obsolete?
Show it to me in the prime salvation example of Abraham, and I'll consider it. We all become saved by having the same faith in the gospel that Abraham had while he was an uncircumcised gentile. I can accept that circumcision of the heart represents baptism of the Holy Spirit, and I see Biblical evidence for that. Show me where Abraham was physically baptized in water, and I'll accept that I must emulate that to be saved.
Baptism isn't a righteousness/salvation issue, it's an obedience issue for those who have already been saved.
[Mar 1:8 NASB] 8 "I baptized you with water; but He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit."
[Act 1:5 NASB] 5 for John baptized with water, but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit not many days from now."
[Act 10:43-48 NASB] 43 "Of Him all the prophets bear witness that through His name everyone who believes in Him receives forgiveness of sins." 44 While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit fell upon all those who were listening to the message. 45 All the circumcised believers who came with Peter were amazed, because the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out on the Gentiles also. 46 For they were hearing them speaking with tongues and exalting God. Then Peter answered, 47 "Surely no one can refuse the water for these to be baptized who have received the Holy Spirit just as we [did,] can he?" 48 And he ordered them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Then they asked him to stay on for a few days.
So we see they were saved and baptized in the Holy Spirit BEFORE being baptized in water.
The words 'you should believe', as also 'suffer' in Greek (Philipians 1:39) are verbs that will grammatically connect to the proper actor based on their spelling and convey the proper intent that God breathed into Paul.
In this particular case, the phrase in your translation 'you should believe' - is the present, active infinitive - πιστεύειν. The infinitive takes away any sense of past or present tense, thus the label of "infinitive." In essence it means that as long as we're alive, we're expected to do these things.
Were your interpretation how one should read it, that's not the form of the verb that would have been used there. It would have been a passive or middle form of the verb indicating that person was receiving the action.
And that word 'should' in your translation implies that the verb used was in the subjunctive mood. But it wasn't. The new king James version does not inject that word, nor does the NASB. I haven't looked at every translation.
The text is quite clear that it is the person (first person singular) who is to believe and suffer, not that he is given the suffering or belief. There is a perfectly grammatical way to say that in Greek without requiring an interpretation of the intent as is sometimes the case in modern English. And in this case, he used the first person form and a pronoun (αυτον) 'he', to emphasize that each individual was expected to perform the action. He didn't grant these things to all or 'you' plural, but to each person.
What we're given are the commands to believe and suffer.
Only if he's an unjust, mocking God. If God gives us commands that we cannot obey and then holds us accountable because he didn't offer the required 'grace' that only he can provide, he's partial and unjust. God argues against that view throughout his scriptures. He's not only just, he calls us to use his standard by which we're to live our life.
If God's standard is that he can ask us to do what we're incapable of doing and then find fault with us when we do not do it, then we are allowed also to use that standard of justice in our lives. Nay, we're COMMANDED to be that arbitrary and unjust.
I am saying just that. If we are born "in sin" - ie; guilty of Adam's sin, and also incapable of obeying God, then he indeed made us that way, and he arbitrarily gives some people the magical power to obey and others he withholds that power. Yet he still holds everyone accountable to the same law.
At least that is how that original sin an magic grace doctrine would have us believe. Paul was not saying that at all. In fact, he was saying that we cannot come to that conclusion because it's absurd.
The vessels come out of the factory all "destined" for honor. They are 'refitted' not created, for dishonor. And that is based on their own obedience, not his predestined design for them to be disobedient. Paul mocked the idea that one would blame God for making him disobedient. He wasn't saying that to question the rationale of making a person out of the gate evil, was something we were not allowed to do, he's already told us that God is impartial. (2:11).
To create some vessels destined for dishonor and some for dishonor, is the very definition of partiality. Thus to read Paul's words as saying God is partial and we're not to question that, is to ignore what was already set up as foundational to his message. (For there is no partiality with God).
When it says that God "hardened Pharaoh's heart" it is the equivalent of saying that Pharaoh was offended by God's words. It is the words themselves and Pharaoh's own mind that hardened Pharaoh's heart. God did not need Pharaoh's heart to be hardened to show his glory. Had Pharaoh let the people of Israel leave Egypt at Moses' first utterance, God's glory would have just as perfectly been demonstrated.
Pharaoh made the choice to be offended and God led the people out of Egypt in SPITE of Pharaoh's refusal.
Al, with all charity in mind I would like to inquire how you concluded the bolded? The text is rendered as “it has been granted” (ESV, NASB) or “it has been graciously granted” (LEB) or “it is given” (KJV), to give a few examples, in reference to believing and suffering, not as “it is expected”. I know you are making an inference; I just wish to know how you do so in the context of the passage.
Al, it seems to me that this is precisely what the passive construction, “it has been granted to you”, indicates. The persons who are on the receiving end of the granting action are the Philippian saints, and that on behalf of Christ. Shortly thereafter we see that what has been granted is “to believe” and “to suffer”.
Indeed, the verb is not in the subjunctive. The phrasing of the ESV is different than the other translations I checked.
For it has been granted to you that for the sake of Christ you should not only believe in him but also suffer for his sake, - Philippians 1:29 (ESV)
For to you it has been granted for Christ’s sake, not only to believe in Him, but also to suffer for His sake, - Philippians 1:29 (NASB)
Comparing the ESV and NASB shows that the ESV translators chose a different construction (that…should) in place of the infinitive form of the NASB. But the meaning remains the same. The ESV is not suggesting the subjunctive mood here. It is indicating that the purpose of the faith and suffering that has been granted is for the sake of Christ (e.g., “it has been granted [so] that”)
Al, I am admittedly lost with your description. I am not a Greek scholar so I can only argue proficiently from English and grammatical standpoints. However, in my resources, the “you” (ὑμῖν) in v29a is in the second person plural, not the first person singular, indicating that Paul has the Philippian saints in mind as when he opened the letter. I am also confused by your reference to “he”. There is a “him” (αὐτὸν) referenced to Christ, but not to individual saints in Philippi.
For to you (ὑμῖν) it has been granted for Christ’s sake, not only to believe in Him (αὐτὸν), but also to suffer for His sake, - Philippians 1:29 (NASB)
If you could show me what textual form you are working with and how you came to these conclusions regarding the grammar, I would be incredibly grateful.
Furthermore, I cannot reach the same conclusion that expectation is the thrust of Paul’s statement or that “to believe” and “to suffer” are merely commands (there is no imperative construction). Grammatically I do not see how this fits the context.
The Scriptures teach that God both commands what he wills and grants what he commands. We are tasked as faithful students of the Word to understand both things in tandem. We must remember that God created man in his image and with moral capacity and duties (Genesis 1:26-28). Adam’s disobedience as our federal head plunged the whole of humanity into sin (Romans 5:12, 18). But Adam’s failure does not undo the righteous requirements of a Holy God. The one who breaks the law does not absolve the law.
The predicament is that we, in sin, cannot submit to the law of God (Romans 8:7-8), yet God commands that we obey him just as he did Adam (the standard has not changed).
Not only are we unable, we are unwilling.
The Scriptures tell us that we are dead in sin, that we are children of wrath by nature, that we are enemies of God (Ephesians 2:1-3).
Our inability to fulfill God’s righteous law because of our sinful nature is not coupled with a desire to be made able to do so. Instead, we willfully suppress the truth of God in unrighteousness and do not honor him as we ought (Romans 1:18, 21).
I do not believe that the charge that God is partial and unjust for holding men accountable despite their inability properly regards God’s justice.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?