Weep Over Jerusalem?

[guuila]

Looks like the Pope is popular, so I'm going to buy a new car....<----non sequitur

Not really. More like:

Premise 1: If it rains today, I'm going to bring an umbrella.
Premise 2: It is raining today.
Conclusion: I bought a new car.

Hope that clears up your confusion.

 

[jdbear]

Hammster said,
What is the relevance to this discussion? And if it's relevant, why aren't you making an argument?

The relevance is, Jesus gathering people would require them to repent. No need to argue this point...unless you believe God reproves people because He doesn't want them to repent.

 

[jdbear]

griff said,
Of what?

Of me pitting one scripture against another. Stall...I mean take as much time as you need.

griff said,
Premise 1: If it rains today, I'm going to bring an umbrella.
Premise 2: It is raining today.
Conclusion: I bought a new car.

Hope that clears up your confusion.

No confusion, just cutting to the chase.

 

[guuila]

Of me pitting one scripture against another. Stall...I mean take as much time as you need.

Thanks... didn't take long to find one. Observe:

Me bringing up Matt. 7 http://www.christianforums.com/t7717935-60/#post62735634

You responding with Rom. 11 in an attempt to defeat Matt. 7 http://www.christianforums.com/t7717935-60/#post62735810

No confusion, just cutting to the chase.

Your example was bad form.

 

[Hammster]

The relevance is, Jesus gathering people would require them to repent. No need to argue this point...unless you believe God reproves people because He doesn't want them to repent.

So He wants them to repent. I'm still waiting for your point.

 

[jdbear]

griff said,
Thanks... didn't take long to find one. Observe:
Me bringing up Matt. 7 http://www.christianforums.com/t7717.../#post62735634
You responding with Rom. 11 in an attempt to defeat Matt. 7 http://www.christianforums.com/t7717.../#post62735810

Romans 11 wasn't a pit against Matthew 7, which is proven by your later misunderstanding, "So Rom. 11 trumps Matt. 7 huh?" (post 598), and my response, "They agree...as all scripture does." (post 645).
Do you know how they agree?

griff said,
Your example was bad form.

Hey, strain at the gnat if you want.

 

[Jack Terrence]

That's what Scripture teaches.

"Enter by the narrow gate. For the gate is wide and the way is easy that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many. For the gate is narrow and the way is hard that leads to life, and those who find it are few." (Matthew 7:13-14 ESV)

Griff,

Matthew 7 cannot be invoked as a proof text for saying that only a few will be saved. Jesus' words spoke to the reality of His own generation. Few were saved in that generation because they were the generation that was to receive the greatest judgment in all of history because they rejected their Messiah.

The scriptures are abundantly clear that the number of the saved will be exceedingly great. God made the covenant of salvation with Abraham saying that his seed would be in number as the "stars of heaven." He also said that their number would be "as the sand on the seashore."

After this I looked, and there before me was a great multitude that no one could count, from every nation, tribe, people and language, standing before the throne and before the Lamb. They were wearing white robes and were holding palm branches in their hands. 10 And they cried out in a loud voice:
“Salvation belongs to our God,
who sits on the throne,
and to the Lamb.”


The number of the saved will not be a few, though that was indeed the case regarding Jesus' generation.

 

[jdbear]

Hammster said,
So He wants them to repent. I'm still waiting for your point.

Point is, God is reproving so peope will repent...people who (according to Calvinists) are incapable of repentance.

 

[Jack Terrence]

Point is, God is reproves so peope will repent...people who (according to Calvinists) are incapable of repentance.

God does not reprove the non elect. He leaves them to themselves.

 

[Hammster]

Point is, God is reproves so peope will repent...people who (according to Calvinists) are incapable of repentance.

And? It would really help if you took time to make an argument so that I don't have to guess at your point.

 

[jdbear]

The Boxer said,
God does not reprove the non elect. He leaves them to themselves.

"But ye have set at nought all my counsel and would none of my reproof...They would none of my counsel, they despised all my reproof." Pr.1:25,30
Boxer, is God speaking of the elect? If not, why is God reproving people who are incapable of repentance?

 

[Arcoe]

God does not reprove the non elect. He leaves them to themselves.

Isaiah 65 -
1 I was sought by those who did not ask for Me; I was found by those who did not seek Me. I said, &#8216;Here I am, here I am,&#8217; to a nation that was not called by My name.
2 I have stretched out My hands all day long to a rebellious people, who walk in a way that is not good, according to their own thoughts;
3 A people who provoke Me to anger continually to My face; who sacrifice in gardens, and burn incense on altars of brick;
4 Who sit among the graves, and spend the night in the tombs; who eat swine&#8217;s flesh, and the broth of abominable things is in their vessels;

Looks like He doesn't leave them to themselves. He stretches out His hand all day long to a rebellious people. Are these the things the elect do? Sounds pretty much like the totally depraved of Calvinism.

Also, I don't think Jesus left the Pharisees to themselves either; He continually told them the way into the kingdom. He warned them of their evil, and the resulting consequences. Paul didn't leave the non-elect to themselves either.

 

[jdbear]

Hammster said,
And? It would really help if you took time to make an argument so that I don't have to guess at your point.

That's ok Hammster. Boxer got the point and explained it away with an unscriptural answer. The Calvinist view of God has Him reproving people who are incapable of repentance and then getting angry at them for not repenting. Can you say Norman Bates?

 

[Arcoe]

"But ye have set at nought all my counsel and would none of my reproof...They would none of my counsel, they despised all my reproof." Pr.1:25,30
Boxer, is God speaking of the elect? If not, why is God reproving people who are incapable of repentance?

If we read verse 24 also, we see something interesting.

Proverbs 1 -
24 Because I have called, and ye refused; I have stretched out my hand, and no man regarded;
25 But ye have set at nought all my counsel, and would none of my reproof:

Here we see God called them and they refused, and even when God stretched out His hand, no man regarded it. Also, they set at nought, or refused all of God's counsel, or purpose.

How can a man refuse God's calling? or not regard His stretched out hand? or set at nought God's counsel, or purpose?

Here we see God called, but His calling was refused. Does man has power over God's calling to where His calling is ineffective? Does man have power over God's own counsel to where His counsel, or purpose is ineffective?

If God stretched out His hand to them and called them, it would seem God's decree would trump anything man might want to do, or so, some on here say.

 

[Hammster]

That's ok Hammster. Boxer got the point and explained it away with an unscriptural answer. The Calvinist view of God has Him reproving people who are incapable of repentance and then getting angry at them for not repenting. Can you say Norman Bates?

They are capable of repenting. They are just unwilling.

 

[jdbear]

Hammster said,
They are capable of repenting. They are just unwilling.

So when God reproves most sinners, it's because He wants them to remain unwilling?

 

[jdbear]

Arcoe said,
Here we see God called them and they refused, and even when God stretched out His hand, no man regarded it. Also, they set at nought, or refused all of God's counsel, or purpose.

How can a man refuse God's calling? or not regard His stretched out hand? or set at nought God's counsel, or purpose?

Here we see God called, but His calling was refused. Does man has power over God's calling to where His calling is ineffective? Does man have power over God's own counsel to where His counsel, or purpose is ineffective?

If God stretched out His hand to them and called them, it would seem God's decree would trump anything man might want to do, or so, some on here say.

Oh Arcoe, don't be silly!!! Can't you see that God corrects people because He doesn't want them to be corrected?

 

[Hammster]

So when God reproves most sinners, it's because He wants them to remain unwilling?

No.

 

[Arcoe]

Oh Arcoe, don't be silly!!! Can't you see that God corrects people because He doesn't want them to be corrected?

Actually this wasn't meant for you. It's for those who believe God's counsel can't be thwarted by man.

 

[jdbear]

Hammster said,
No.

So when God reproves people, it's because He wants them to be saved, isn't it?