John Calvin and Calvinism.

[GodsGrace]

And you are wrong and misinterpret Piper and MacArthur.

Most Calvinists believe in free will in the meaning that we have the freedom to choose what we desire. I'm sure you agree with this. However, nobody desires God. Nobody is good, or righteous. So without a change in desire, a supernatural change, a dragging by God (which is in Scripture) nobody chooses God. That is Calvinism. That is what the Bible states.

I don't misinterpret Piper and Macarthur.

John Piper believes God directs the dust in the air...
Need I find the statement he made?
I can.

They both have stated that God created and predestines evil acts...
I can find that too.
And even John Calvin taught this.

It's common sense that if a person believes God predestinated everything...
that has to include evil too.

 

[GodsGrace]

@reformed1689

I have to leave...it's really late here.
If you wish to respond, I'll be happy read it.

 

[reformed1689]

We all choose what we desire. I said that.
So what's compatible free will then?

We're not speaking here about desiring God.
This is a different topic that goes to the idea of total depravity.

I'm talking about CHOICES that we make on a daily basis.
Are they FREE in calvinism?

And God changes the heart of every born again believer.

As to DRAGGING...that's a different topic too.
DRAWN has different meanings in Greek....
We can't discuss 3 things at one time.
Stick to who decides on who goes where....
and free will.

It all goes together. And yes you are FREE to choose what you DESIRE. It is what you DESIRE that you do not choose.

 

[GodsGrace]

It all goes together. And yes you are FREE to choose what you DESIRE. It is what you DESIRE that you do not choose.

You say we are free to choose what we desire.
Who decides what we desire?

 

[PinSeeker]

Hi PS, Do you suppose we could have a calm and slightly intelligent discussion about the reformed faith? I find this rather difficult to do, but it might be possible with you.

Sure! I don't think I'm alone in this, but that's always my goal. One of them, anyway...

Seems like most just want to prove their point...

Yeah, that's kind of an easy pit to fall into on a message board, I think.

I'm just trying to understand how anyone could believe in such a God as the reformed God.

Hmm, well, I'd have to be able to grasp the concept you have of this "reformed God." I think I have an idea what you mean, but I'll wait to hear from you; I guess that's what your about to get to.

So, one thing at a time....

Sure.

I find that verses are taken out of context or are labeled DESCRIPTIVE.... for instance with John 3:16 Calvinists will say that it is describing those saved again and NOT PRESCRIBING HOW to become saved.

Well, as a Calvinist... ... I would actually say neither is the case. I'm just going to quote it, and then offer my thoughts based on what you say here. So, quoting, it says, "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life." My immediate thought is, John is describing what God did (gave His Son), and why He did it (because He so loved the world), and... and this is closer to what you're asking here, I think... generally, who the beneficiaries would be (whoever believes) and how they might benefit (obtain eternal life). I think I know that the issue you have with Calvinists is the understanding of this 'whoever.' We can get to that, and whatever else you have in mind.

Let's just take one verse you posted above:
Romans 9:16 NLT "Are we saying, then, that God was unfair? Of course not! For God said to Moses, 'I will show mercy to anyone I choose, and I will show compassion to anyone I choose.' So it is God who decides to show mercy. We can neither choose it nor work for it." Here it is in a more familiar version, which is the one I actually use... "So then it does not depend on the man who wills or the man who runs, but on God who has mercy."

Yes, I'm with you here on preferring the latter version, rather than the former. The former is not wrong, but more easily misunderstood than the latter. If the latter is from the NASB, which I think it might be, yes, I like that version, too. That one and the ESV are my preferred translations, really more so the ESV, but the NIV is pretty close, too. The ESV states it this way: "So then it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God, who has mercy."

First, I have to say that Romans 9, 10 and 11 is discussing corporate salvation and not individual salvation.

I would disagree with this, and say that it is about individual salvation... and corporate salvation ~ in the sense that this "corporation" is made up of individuals. What Paul is saying here in Romans 9 is couched clearly in terms referring to individuals who "will" (make decisions) and "run" (take action on said decisions). This can really only be done on an individual basis. And the examples he cites are Jacob and Esau, who were individuals. And at the end of Romans 9, he clearly refers to individuals, including himself, by referring to "vessels of wrath" and "vessels of mercy," and that these "vessels of mercy" are, individually, but together "(those) whom He has called, not from the Jews only but also from the Gentiles." But it becomes corporate by the end of Romans 11, as we see in verse 26, where he says, "in this way all Israel will be saved." I'll express this in the form of a parable ~ each member of a football team (all the position players) will do their jobs, and in this way they will all get Super Bowl championship rings, and in this way, the (insert team name here... I hope it's the San Francisco 49ers this year... will be the Super Bowl champions.

Paul is trying to show the Jews that they have not believed in Jesus but the Gentiles have...

Yes, I agree, but individuals make up these groups, right? We can't ignore the trees in favor of the forest, so to speak. Each tree has it's own... leaves... or pine needles, I guess... You get my point. We all will and run according to ourselves and not others, right?

But anyway, here's how I understand verse 16:
It does not depend on us to decide who will be saved and who will not.
It does not depend on our works, or whatever other method we may wish to use to decide on our own what saves.
It's up to God to declare on whom He will have mercy...it's up to God to make the rules.
Not in deciding WHO will be saved...
but in deciding HOW one comes to be saved.
God decides on whom He will have mercy...
and He tells us which persons are the "who"...

It's God who knew we would fail (He did not predestine the failure) and created a plan to still save we humans, if we so wished.
The plan was The Christ and whether or not we chose to accept, believe, and follow Him.

If you want to get into Pharoah, I'm willing, but it seems to be a different topic.
Please explain how a calvinist understands Romans 9:16....

Okay, I'm going to address these statements one at a time, your quotes, and then my comment immediately following:

* "It does not depend on us to decide who will be saved and who will not."

I agree, of course, but this statement is misdirected. What Paul is saying is that ~ and I'm just going to use myself here ~ it does not depend on PinSeeker and his will or action, but on God who may or may not have mercy and compassion on him.​

* "It does not depend on our works, or whatever other method we may wish to use to decide on our own what saves."

Well, if we are saved, not what saves. He already has talked, in Romans 3:24 and Romans 6:23, about what saves. In Romans 9:16, Paul's saying that it depends on neither our deciding one way or the other OR what we might do to earn God's favor. It depends on God's will and His having mercy/compassion on the individual or not.​

* "It's up to God to declare on whom He will have mercy...it's up to God to make the rules."

Right. Agree.​

* Not in deciding WHO will be saved... but in deciding HOW one comes to be saved.

Disagree. That's... not what Romans 9-11 is about. It's about who, not how. Individually first, and then corporately as a "team." You and you and you and you... And then all of you together. Each of us upon whom God has mercy/compassion, each of us whom God calls, is a member of His elect and of Israel, and all of us together make up God's Israel.​

* "God decides on whom He will have mercy... and He tells us which persons are the "who"...

Agree. But in this statement, or these two statements, you seem to be contradicting your own statement above, that "Romans 9, 10 and 11 is discussing corporate salvation and not individual salvation."​

The last part of what you said I will address in the next post. So, continued below:

 

[PinSeeker]

* "It's God who knew we would fail (He did not predestine the failure) and created a plan to still save we humans, if we so wished. The plan was The Christ and whether or not we chose to accept, believe, and follow Him."

No Calvinist ~ if he truly understands Scripture as John Calvin did ~ thinks God "predestined failure." In a real sense, man predestined this failure himself, in the person of Adam, who is the federal head of the human race. This is the natural condition of all men and women from birth, because of this nature we have inherited from Adam, which he took on when he disobeyed God in Genesis 3. BUT FOR SOME ~ His elect, those whom He has mercy and compassion on, by His own choosing, as you yourself say ~ God reverses that predestination by changing their hearts from hearts of stone into hearts of flesh and putting His Spirit within them, thus causing them to walk in His statutes and to be careful to obey His rules, and they are then His people, and He is their God, as Ezekiel puts it in chapters 11 and 36 of his prophecy. This is according to God's purpose of election, as Paul is saying in Romans 9, which is not according to whether anyone does anything good or bad, but according to His mercy, that His purpose of election might continue, not because of works but because of him who calls (Romans 9:11). And this fits perfectly with what Paul writes to the Ephesians, namely: "But God, being rich in mercy, because of the great love with which He loved us, even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ ~ by grace you have been saved ~ and raised us up with Him and seated us with Him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, so that in the coming ages He might show the immeasurable riches of His grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus. For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them" (Ephesians 2:4-11).​

Now, none of this ~ none of it ~ takes away from the fact that people do in fact make a choice, and a free-will choice at that. There is no other kind of choice; a choice is made according to the will, by definition. Paul does not say anything to intimate that we don't make a choice, but only that it doesn't depend on our choice, but rather on God and His mercy. But regarding our will and resulting choice(s), the will is driven by the nature ~ who and what the person is at his/her core, in his/her inner being. And because of our natural state, because of who and what we are from birth (because of our nature of sinfulness, even though when we are first born we may not yet have sinned, but we still are what we are... our nature is what it is even though we may not yet have acted on it, because we have inherited this state of being, this nature, this deadness in sin, this slavery to unrighteousness, as Paul calls it in Romans 5, namely, that "sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men from Adam") if we remain in this natural state, we will not fail to choose... unwisely. And that takes us back to the Ephesians 2 verses above: "BUT GOD, being rich in mercy... this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not as a result of works, so that no one may boast."

Now, I'm going to address the very first part of what you said here, that "It's God who knew we would fail"... This word 'knew' is, well, misunderstood. I mean, I know how you are using it here; I understand you. But God did not "look forward down the corridors of time" and see who would choose Him and who would not, and thus base His predestination that we're talking about on us. There are several things going on here:

* God is not inside our linear time. Our chronological time is part of His creation. He is "I AM," or, in other words, is, regardless of where we are in our time. This is really impossible for us to completely comprehend or grasp, but He is in the eternal now; all times are right now to God. If we think He is taking a long time to do something, to Him, it is going to be done, is being done, and has been done all concurrently... now. Yes, that sounds kind of crazy to us, but as Paul says in Romans 8, "those whom He foreknew He also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that He might be the firstborn among many brothers... those whom He predestined He also called, and those whom He called He also justified, and those whom He justified He also glorified." You will notice, I'm sure, that this is all past tense. This is really difficult, if not impossible to grasp, but, well, it's God's Word, so it's true.

* We should understand 'knew' in the same sense of 'loved.' And I'm going to pull in Romans 8:29 here, specifically "those whom He foreknew He also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son. Surely you can see that this cannot mean merely that He knew beforehand, because in that sense, God foreknows everybody and what they will do in their times, as I'm sure you will agree. But Paul is talking about a specific group of people here; the strong inference is that God did not foreknow some. So 'foreknew,' as Paul uses the word here, cannot mean that He merely "knew beforehand" No, 'foreknew' should be understood as 'fore-loved." Well, of course He loves all His creation, all people. But what Paul is saying is that God fore-loved some, loved some in a sovereign, distinguishing way, an active way in which he does not love others, though He does love them also. In a lesser, non-eternal sense, as a father and a Christian, I love all of God's creation, so I love all people, and thus all children, but I love my own children in an active, distinguishing way. So it is with God, but on a much higher level, of course, regarding His elect.​

Okay I think I went way beyond your immediate question. Sorry about that. I welcome your thoughts.

Grace and peace to you.

 

[PinSeeker]

You say we are free to choose what we desire.

We ourselves do, but our desires are driven by our nature, by what and who we are in our inner selves, our heart.

Who decides what we desire?

No, the question is, who or what decides whether or nature remains as it is or becomes something new... whether we are left as we are, left to ourselves... or changed into something we were formerly not... whether or not we are reborn of, well, Something Else.

Grace and peace to you.

 

[farouk]

I think that Calvin has been misrepresented by many who call themselves Calvinists. I carefully read his commentary on Romans, 1 Corinthians, John's Gospel, 1 John, and 1 & 2 Thessalonians, and am currently reading through Isaiah. What I observe is that everything he says is totally consistent with the passages of Scripture he comments on. When he talks about election, he puts believing the Gospel first, then worrying about election next. He is quite clear that man cannot have "saving faith" without the enlightenment of the Holy Spirit. He basis his view on what Romans actually says. Concerning predestination, he is clear that believers are predestined to be conformed to the image of Christ, but leaves the rest up to God's secret decrees which he does not recommend that people be over curious about. He says that some zealous fanatics have made a big deal about predestination and election which he doesn't go along with. Overall, his view is that the invitation to believe the Gospel is open to all and that the priority is to believe the Gospel and to seek God for "saving faith" to bring about genuine conversion to Christ.

@Paul Christensen Reminds me of what C H Spurgeon said when asked how he reconciled God's sovereignty with human responsibility. He replied that he would not like to try to reconcile two friends....

(Typical Spurgeon... )

 

[Enoch111]

I think that Calvin has been misrepresented by many who call themselves Calvinists. I carefully read his commentary on Romans, 1 Corinthians, John's Gospel, 1 John, and 1 & 2 Thessalonians, and am currently reading through Isaiah. What I observe is that everything he says is totally consistent with the passages of Scripture he comments on.

True. But after reading his commentaries read his "Institutes". They flatly contradict what is said in his commentaries and fall in line with the Westminster Confession. Which means that Calvin was double-minded.

The real issue is "Why was Calvin promoting a false gospel, when he knew the truth? Why has Calvin been deified when ultimately he was a false teacher?"

 

[reformed1689]

True. But after reading his commentaries read his "Institutes". They flatly contradict what is said in his commentaries and fall in line with the Westminster Confession. Which means that Calvin was double-minded.

The real issue is "Why was Calvin promoting a false gospel, when he knew the truth? Why has Calvin been deified when ultimately he was a false teacher?"

Fact: he did no such thing.

 

[Lifelong_sinner]

True. But after reading his commentaries read his "Institutes". They flatly contradict what is said in his commentaries and fall in line with the Westminster Confession. Which means that Calvin was double-minded.

The real issue is "Why was Calvin promoting a false gospel, when he knew the truth? Why has Calvin been deified when ultimately he was a false teacher?"

can we get an emoji of a smiley face beating a dead horse around here?????

 

[GodsGrace]

Sure! I don't think I'm alone in this, but that's always my goal. One of them, anyway...

Hmm, well, I'd have to be able to grasp the concept you have of this "reformed God." I think I have an idea what you mean, but I'll wait to hear from you; I guess that's what your about to get to.

My comment was that I don't understand how anyone could worship this reformed God.
So what do I mean by that:
The God that comes through to me and other non-reformed persons is a God that loves His creation (us),
that has mercy and this is why He made a plan of escape for those who choose to serve Him and not the enemy,
and a God that is just in all His dealings with us.
Justice means giving to each person what that person deserves.

Simply put, a God that chooses, unconditionally, whom He wishes to save cannot be this God.
I believe Calvinism changes the nature of God into a God that is not recognizable.

Well, as a Calvinist... ... I would actually say neither is the case. I'm just going to quote it, and then offer my thoughts based on what you say here. So, quoting, it says, "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life." My immediate thought is, John is describing what God did (gave His Son), and why He did it (because He so loved the world), and... and this is closer to what you're asking here, I think... generally, who the beneficiaries would be (whoever believes) and how they might benefit (obtain eternal life). I think I know that the issue you have with Calvinists is the understanding of this 'whoever.' We can get to that, and whatever else you have in mind.

My comment was that verses are taken out of context and are labeled DESCRIPTIVE (instead of prescriptive)...I posted John 3:16

God so loved the world: Some say He does not love the world. The verse clearly states He does.
And, yes, WHO are the beneficiaries? Isn't it WHOSOEVER believes? Isn't this PRESCRIPTIVE?
Didn't Jesus die to save those that would believe in Him?
How could the WHOSOEVER be only those that believe in Jesus because God chose them to?
Doesn't verse 20 mean anything to you...
John 3:20-21
20“For everyone who does evil hates the Light, and does not come to the Light for fear that his deeds will be exposed.
21“But he who practices the truth comes to the Light, so that his deeds may be manifested as having been wrought in God.”

It's speaking about those that do good.
And those that do evil.
It says they either do or do not come to the light...
Those that come to the light are following God.

(one reply and that'll be it -- I'm not pounding the horse to death)

Yes, I'm with you here on preferring the latter version, rather than the former. The former is not wrong, but more easily misunderstood than the latter. If the latter is from the NASB, which I think it might be, yes, I like that version, too. That one and the ESV are my preferred translations, really more so the ESV, but the NIV is pretty close, too. The ESV states it this way: "So then it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God, who has mercy."

Yes, I use the NASB. 40 years worth.
I'm trying to use the NLB but I'm getting resistance...

I think we could skip this...we both know how we understand it.
Just want to say that it is through God's mercy that He saves anyone...
and that He lets us KNOW HOW we can be saved.
I think this is a big difference between our understanding of the N.T. (and God).
And it does not depend on US,,,what we DO, or on our will....but on HIS MERCY to be able to forgive us.

I would disagree with this, and say that it is about individual salvation... and corporate salvation ~ in the sense that this "corporation" is made up of individuals. What Paul is saying here in Romans 9 is couched clearly in terms referring to individuals who "will" (make decisions) and "run" (take action on said decisions). This can really only be done on an individual basis. And the examples he cites are Jacob and Esau, who were individuals. And at the end of Romans 9, he clearly refers to individuals, including himself, by referring to "vessels of wrath" and "vessels of mercy," and that these "vessels of mercy" are, individually, but together "(those) whom He has called, not from the Jews only but also from the Gentiles." But it becomes corporate by the end of Romans 11, as we see in verse 26, where he says, "in this way all Israel will be saved." I'll express this in the form of a parable ~ each member of a football team (all the position players) will do their jobs, and in this way they will all get Super Bowl championship rings, and in this way, the (insert team name here... I hope it's the San Francisco 49ers this year... will be the Super Bowl champions.

LOL, no more football for me. It's soccer here and I don't really care for it.
I use the analogy of a football team too. I guess I should state it.

God is sovereign and has a big plan we don't really know about (or maybe not) but, in the end, God will have everything end just the way He wants it to. We cannot change God's plan. But He gave us free will (different topic)...so how to reconcile the two?

It's like a football game.
Every player plays the best he can and each play is designed beforehand and so to win that play and score.
Each player is free to do as he so chooses...
But God puts all the plays together so that in the end, the team HE wants to win, will win.
I thought this was a good analogy and haven't ever thought of a better one.

Yes, I agree, but individuals make up these groups, right? We can't ignore the trees in favor of the forest, so to speak. Each tree has it's own... leaves... or pine needles, I guess... You get my point. We all will and run according to ourselves and not others, right?

Discussing Romans 9, 10 and 11 here.

But can we ignore the forest in favor of the trees!
Paul is discussing in chapter 9 how God choses Israel to show His plan and to carry it forward.
It's speaking of the nation...the nation was elected.
But Jesus came as the Messiah and He was not accepted as such.
But God has to carry forward His plan anyway.
Paul is speaking to those that were complaining that the Gentiles were not part of the promise. (to Abraham).
This is when Paul states that God has not failed. verse 6
The Jews are not children just because they were born of Abraham...but they are descendants through Isaac.
He was the child of promise...not Ishmael...he was of the flesh.
It's God that chooses the child of promise.

And so with Esau and Jacob.
God called Jacob for His own purposes.
And so Esau would serve Jacob...and, in fact, this is how it turned out.

If you check verse 17 God chose Pharoah for the PURPOSE of displaying His power.

IOW,,, God chooses for PURPOSE and not for salvation.

Then Paul goes on to say how the O.T. prophesied that the Gentiles would also be included...
(as in the Davidic Covenant - AND the Abrahamic Covenant also).

I really don't feel qualified to have this discussion, but this chapter is the only one, IMO, that speaks as though God did choose for salvation...but really it's for purpose.

Okay, I'm going to address these statements one at a time, your quotes, and then my comment immediately following:

* "It does not depend on us to decide who will be saved and who will not."

I agree, of course, but this statement is misdirected. What Paul is saying is that ~ and I'm just going to use myself here ~ it does not depend on PinSeeker and his will or action, but on God who may or may not have mercy and compassion on him.​

* "It does not depend on our works, or whatever other method we may wish to use to decide on our own what saves."

Well, if we are saved, not what saves. He already has talked, in Romans 3:24 and Romans 6:23, about what saves. In Romans 9:16, Paul's saying that it depends on neither our deciding one way or the other OR what we might do to earn God's favor. It depends on God's will and His having mercy/compassion on the individual or not.​

* "It's up to God to declare on whom He will have mercy...it's up to God to make the rules."

Right. Agree.​

* Not in deciding WHO will be saved... but in deciding HOW one comes to be saved.

Disagree. That's... not what Romans 9-11 is about. It's about who, not how. Individually first, and then corporately as a "team." You and you and you and you... And then all of you together. Each of us upon whom God has mercy/compassion, each of us whom God calls, is a member of His elect and of Israel, and all of us together make up God's Israel.​

* "God decides on whom He will have mercy... and He tells us which persons are the "who"...

Agree. But in this statement, or these two statements, you seem to be contradicting your own statement above, that "Romans 9, 10 and 11 is discussing corporate salvation and not individual salvation."​

The last part of what you said I will address in the next post. So, continued below:

By "which persons are the WHO" I wasn't contradicting myself...I was saying that God let's us know HOW to be saved and THOSE PERSONS that choose to be so will be the WHO.

The rest is covered above.
The HOW instead the the WHO is very important to how scripture is written and how I understand it.

 

[GodsGrace]

@PinSeeker

No more time.
12:30 am
to be cont'd....

 

[Lifelong_sinner]

My comment was that I don't understand how anyone could worship this reformed God.
So what do I mean by that:
The God that comes through to me and other non-reformed persons is a God that loves His creation (us),
that has mercy and this is why He made a plan of escape for those who choose to serve Him and not the enemy,
and a God that is just in all His dealings with us.
Justice means giving to each person what that person deserves.

Simply put, a God that chooses, unconditionally, whom He wishes to save cannot be this God.
I believe Calvinism changes the nature of God into a God that is not recognizable.



My comment was that verses are taken out of context and are labeled DESCRIPTIVE (instead of prescriptive)...I posted John 3:16

God so loved the world: Some say He does not love the world. The verse clearly states He does.
And, yes, WHO are the beneficiaries? Isn't it WHOSOEVER believes? Isn't this PRESCRIPTIVE?
Didn't Jesus die to save those that would believe in Him?
How could the WHOSOEVER be only those that believe in Jesus because God chose them to?
Doesn't verse 20 mean anything to you...
John 3:20-21
20“For everyone who does evil hates the Light, and does not come to the Light for fear that his deeds will be exposed.
21“But he who practices the truth comes to the Light, so that his deeds may be manifested as having been wrought in God.”

It's speaking about those that do good.
And those that do evil.
It says they either do or do not come to the light...
Those that come to the light are following God.

(one reply and that'll be it -- I'm not pounding the horse to death)


Yes, I use the NASB. 40 years worth.
I'm trying to use the NLB but I'm getting resistance...

I think we could skip this...we both know how we understand it.
Just want to say that it is through God's mercy that He saves anyone...
and that He lets us KNOW HOW we can be saved.
I think this is a big difference between our understanding of the N.T. (and God).
And it does not depend on US,,,what we DO, or on our will....but on HIS MERCY to be able to forgive us.


LOL, no more football for me. It's soccer here and I don't really care for it.
I use the analogy of a football team too. I guess I should state it.

God is sovereign and has a big plan we don't really know about (or maybe not) but, in the end, God will have everything end just the way He wants it to. We cannot change God's plan. But He gave us free will (different topic)...so how to reconcile the two?

It's like a football game.
Every player plays the best he can and each play is designed beforehand and so to win that play and score.
Each player is free to do as he so chooses...
But God puts all the plays together so that in the end, the team HE wants to win, will win.
I thought this was a good analogy and haven't ever thought of a better one.


Discussing Romans 9, 10 and 11 here.

But can we ignore the forest in favor of the trees!
Paul is discussing in chapter 9 how God choses Israel to show His plan and to carry it forward.
It's speaking of the nation...the nation was elected.
But Jesus came as the Messiah and He was not accepted as such.
But God has to carry forward His plan anyway.
Paul is speaking to those that were complaining that the Gentiles were not part of the promise. (to Abraham).
This is when Paul states that God has not failed. verse 6
The Jews are not children just because they were born of Abraham...but they are descendants through Isaac.
He was the child of promise...not Ishmael...he was of the flesh.
It's God that chooses the child of promise.

And so with Esau and Jacob.
God called Jacob for His own purposes.
And so Esau would serve Jacob...and, in fact, this is how it turned out.

If you check verse 17 God chose Pharoah for the PURPOSE of displaying His power.

IOW,,, God chooses for PURPOSE and not for salvation.

Then Paul goes on to say how the O.T. prophesied that the Gentiles would also be included...
(as in the Davidic Covenant - AND the Abrahamic Covenant also).

I really don't feel qualified to have this discussion, but this chapter is the only one, IMO, that speaks as though God did choose for salvation...but really it's for purpose.


By "which persons are the WHO" I wasn't contradicting myself...I was saying that God let's us know HOW to be saved and THOSE PERSONS that choose to be so will be the WHO.

The rest is covered above.
The HOW instead the the WHO is very important to how scripture is written and how I understand it.

ahhh ok. Now i see where the problem is. You think people can choose God on their own. Paul says the opposite.

 

[reformed1689]

My comment was that I don't understand how anyone could worship this reformed God.
So what do I mean by that:
The God that comes through to me and other non-reformed persons is a God that loves His creation (us),
that has mercy and this is why He made a plan of escape for those who choose to serve Him and not the enemy,
and a God that is just in all His dealings with us.
Justice means giving to each person what that person deserves.

Simply put, a God that chooses, unconditionally, whom He wishes to save cannot be this God.
I believe Calvinism changes the nature of God into a God that is not recognizable.



My comment was that verses are taken out of context and are labeled DESCRIPTIVE (instead of prescriptive)...I posted John 3:16

God so loved the world: Some say He does not love the world. The verse clearly states He does.
And, yes, WHO are the beneficiaries? Isn't it WHOSOEVER believes? Isn't this PRESCRIPTIVE?
Didn't Jesus die to save those that would believe in Him?
How could the WHOSOEVER be only those that believe in Jesus because God chose them to?
Doesn't verse 20 mean anything to you...
John 3:20-21
20“For everyone who does evil hates the Light, and does not come to the Light for fear that his deeds will be exposed.
21“But he who practices the truth comes to the Light, so that his deeds may be manifested as having been wrought in God.”

It's speaking about those that do good.
And those that do evil.
It says they either do or do not come to the light...
Those that come to the light are following God.

(one reply and that'll be it -- I'm not pounding the horse to death)


Yes, I use the NASB. 40 years worth.
I'm trying to use the NLB but I'm getting resistance...

I think we could skip this...we both know how we understand it.
Just want to say that it is through God's mercy that He saves anyone...
and that He lets us KNOW HOW we can be saved.
I think this is a big difference between our understanding of the N.T. (and God).
And it does not depend on US,,,what we DO, or on our will....but on HIS MERCY to be able to forgive us.


LOL, no more football for me. It's soccer here and I don't really care for it.
I use the analogy of a football team too. I guess I should state it.

God is sovereign and has a big plan we don't really know about (or maybe not) but, in the end, God will have everything end just the way He wants it to. We cannot change God's plan. But He gave us free will (different topic)...so how to reconcile the two?

It's like a football game.
Every player plays the best he can and each play is designed beforehand and so to win that play and score.
Each player is free to do as he so chooses...
But God puts all the plays together so that in the end, the team HE wants to win, will win.
I thought this was a good analogy and haven't ever thought of a better one.


Discussing Romans 9, 10 and 11 here.

But can we ignore the forest in favor of the trees!
Paul is discussing in chapter 9 how God choses Israel to show His plan and to carry it forward.
It's speaking of the nation...the nation was elected.
But Jesus came as the Messiah and He was not accepted as such.
But God has to carry forward His plan anyway.
Paul is speaking to those that were complaining that the Gentiles were not part of the promise. (to Abraham).
This is when Paul states that God has not failed. verse 6
The Jews are not children just because they were born of Abraham...but they are descendants through Isaac.
He was the child of promise...not Ishmael...he was of the flesh.
It's God that chooses the child of promise.

And so with Esau and Jacob.
God called Jacob for His own purposes.
And so Esau would serve Jacob...and, in fact, this is how it turned out.

If you check verse 17 God chose Pharoah for the PURPOSE of displaying His power.

IOW,,, God chooses for PURPOSE and not for salvation.

Then Paul goes on to say how the O.T. prophesied that the Gentiles would also be included...
(as in the Davidic Covenant - AND the Abrahamic Covenant also).

I really don't feel qualified to have this discussion, but this chapter is the only one, IMO, that speaks as though God did choose for salvation...but really it's for purpose.


By "which persons are the WHO" I wasn't contradicting myself...I was saying that God let's us know HOW to be saved and THOSE PERSONS that choose to be so will be the WHO.

The rest is covered above.
The HOW instead the the WHO is very important to how scripture is written and how I understand it.

Jesus disagrees with you. He laid his life down for the SHEEP.

 

[reformed1689]

ahhh ok. Now i see where the problem is. You think people can choose God on their own. Paul says the opposite.

Exactly, they want God in their box conforming to their terms.

 

[GodsGrace]

ahhh ok. Now i see where the problem is. You think people can choose God on their own. Paul says the opposite.

You're going to have to show me from scripture.
If you don't post scripture, please don't reply to me.

YOU think people cannot choose God on their own.

See, we're getting nowhere.

Here's why I believe we choose God freely:

Deuteronomy 30:19
19I 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,


Joshua 24:15
And if it is evil in your eyes to serve the Lord, choose this day whom you will serve, whether the gods your fathers served in the region beyond the River, or the gods of the Amorites in whose land you dwell. But as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.”


Romans 10:9
9Because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.


2 Peter 3:9
9The Lord is not slow to fulfill his promise as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance.


Revelation 3:20
20Behold, I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and eat with him, and he with me.


John 1:12
12But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God,


Hebrews 11:6
6And without faith it is impossible to please him, for whoever would draw near to God must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who seek him.


There's more but this should suffice to show that IF we so desire,
we can gravitate toward God, repent and believe for our salvation.

And instead of playing verse ping-pong, why not explain what you believe the above verses mean?
They seem very clear if approached with an open mind and no preconceived ideas.

 

[GodsGrace]

Jesus disagrees with you. He laid his life down for the SHEEP.

I wasn't discussing Limited Atonement.
So I'm not sure what your comment means...

 

[PinSeeker]

My comment was that I don't understand how anyone could worship this reformed God. So what do I mean by that: The God that comes through to me and other non-reformed persons is a God that loves His creation (us), that has mercy and this is why He made a plan of escape for those who choose to serve Him and not the enemy, and a God that is just in all His dealings with us. Justice means giving to each person what that person deserves. Simply put, a God that chooses, unconditionally, whom He wishes to save cannot be this God. I believe Calvinism changes the nature of God into a God that is not recognizable.

GodsGrace, your idea of the God described by the Reformers and those that have come after is quite different that what it really is. No person with any modicum of knowledge of the reformed understanding of God would disagree that God loves His creation... all of it, and especially us, who He made in His own image. To insinuate that reformed persons think otherwise... well, that's just surely not the case. And any reformed person would surely agree with you regarding God's justice, but I think it's important to discuss that, too, so I'll come back to that.

What we have to do, GodsGrace is, we have to go back to the very beginning. Yes, God loves His creation (us, and all the rest of it) ~ he created it for His own glory, after all, and on top of that, once finished, pronounced it very good (Genesis 1). Let me ask you this, GodsGrace. This question may seem a bit ridiculous on its face, but let me get your thoughts regarding this question:

* Why is it necessary for God to have mercy? Or put another, similar way, why is His mercy even necessary? To explain the question, if God created everything (which He did), and He made it all ~ even man ~ very good (He wasn't mistaken when He acknowledged its goodness, again, in Genesis 1... plus it apparently met His standard of "very good," which is even far beyond our standard of "very good"), then initially and up to a certain point, His mercy was not necessary. Right? Well, yes, right. Something happened, regarding man and all His creation, at some point to make God's mercy necessary. So that begs another question:

* What happened after God's act of creation to make His mercy necessary? Why did redemption become necessary? And how far-reaching was this thing that happened that made His mercy and redemption necessary? What happened?

I think we would agree, actually, on the basic answers to these questions, but maybe not in scope... what the consequences of this thing that happened actually were and how far-reaching it really was/is. If we really understand that, But let me know your thoughts.

One more thing, though... I want to address just briefly your statement that He "made a plan of escape for those who choose to serve Him and not the enemy." I would submit to you, GodsGrace, that there's something possibly troubling about that statement. On the surface, it seems pretty innocuous, but if we start analyzing it... maybe not so much. So:

* We agree that God made a plan; He provided this solution. He made a plan, in view of this thing that happened, to set everything back to how He made it ~ again, very good ~ and provided a means for that to happen, a way to accomplish that, a way for Him to accomplish that on our behalf, for us, to satisfy His justice, which is perfect and cannot be compromised, and thus uphold His glory. But I would say ~ and maybe you would agree ~ that God's His solution/provision was sufficient to accomplish the redemption of all people, not just those who choose to serve Him, if only for the reason that all are in need of this redemption, because He loves, as we agreed, all His creation.

* And if that is true, if God were to limit this provision to only a few or even many ~ make it available to only some ~ that would not be very loving. I would think you agree with that.

* Finally, to say "for those who choose to serve Him and not the enemy" is true on its face, but we cannot make this plan dependent on man's choice, as that would fly in the face of what Paul says in Romans 9:16, that His electing some to salvation "depends not on human will or exertion, but on God, who has mercy" (ESV) or "does not depend on the man who wills or the man who runs, but on God who has mercy" (NASB). Paul does not intimate in any way that we do not make a choice, but that God's election does not depend on it.

Continued in next post...

 

[PinSeeker]

My comment was that verses are taken out of context and are labeled DESCRIPTIVE (instead of prescriptive)...I posted John 3:16 God so loved the world: Some say He does not love the world. The verse clearly states He does.

Right, well I would say both; descriptive and prescriptive.

And, yes, WHO are the beneficiaries? Isn't it WHOSOEVER believes? Isn't this PRESCRIPTIVE? Didn't Jesus die to save those that would believe in Him? How could the WHOSOEVER be only those that believe in Jesus because God chose them to?

See, there is more to this question than you realize, I think. Do you know what Old Testament passage John is referring to when he says 'whosoever' in John 3:16? He's referring to Joel 2:32. Here's that whole passage:

“And it shall come to pass afterward, that I will pour out my Spirit on all flesh; your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, your old men shall dream dreams, and your young men shall see visions. Even on the male and female servants in those days I will pour out my Spirit. And I will show wonders in the heavens and on the earth, blood and fire and columns of smoke. The sun shall be turned to darkness, and the moon to blood, before the great and awesome day of the LORD comes. And it shall come to pass that everyone who calls on the name of the LORD shall be saved. For in Mount Zion and in Jerusalem there shall be those who escape, as the LORD has said, and among the survivors shall be those whom the LORD calls." (Joel 2:28-32)​

Read that last sentence carefully (underlined). The "everyone who calls on the name of the LORD" in the first sentence is qualified by the "For..." in the last sentence. So the "everyone who calls on the name of the LORD" is a subset of the survivors of the last sentence, and these individuals will call on the name of the LORD because they have been called by the LORD. Do you see that? Think about it. And in light of that, think of what Paul says in Romans 8:28... which immediately precedes Romans 9... that "...for those who love God all things work together for good, for those who are called according to his purpose. So, God's calling is first, and then those who call on the name of the LORD inevitably comes after.

...it is through God's mercy that He saves anyone...

Agree...

...and that He lets us KNOW HOW we can be saved.

Well, and He tells us how He does it, too.

Each player is free to do as he so chooses...

So long as he's doing what the coach told him/her to do, right.

Discussing Romans 9, 10 and 11 here... Paul is discussing in chapter 9 how God chooses Israel to show His plan and to carry it forward.

Yes, but he's talking very specifically about the individuals that make up God's Israel. Read on...

It's speaking of the nation...the nation was elected.

Then why does Paul (the Holy Spirit, ultimately) specifically couch it in terms of individuals? He's talking about each one that together make up God's Israel. Thus Romans 11:25-26, that "a partial hardening has come upon Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in... (a)nd in this way all Israel will be saved."

God chooses for PURPOSE and not for salvation.

No, Paul specifically says, concerning individuals, in Romans 9:

"not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel, and not all are children of Abraham because they are his offspring, but 'Through Isaac shall your offspring be named.' This means that it is not the children of the flesh who are the children of God, but the children of the promise are counted as offspring... And not only so, but also when Rebekah had conceived children by one man, our forefather Isaac, though they were not yet born and had done nothing either good or bad ~ in order that God’s purpose of election might continue, not because of works but because of Him who calls..." (Romans 9:8-11)​

Which also fits right along with what Joel says in Joel 2 as cited above. Plus, he uses the same 'everyone' in Romans 10:18 as Joel's 'everyone' in Joel 2:32; he refers directly to Joel also.

...but this chapter (Romans 9) is the only one, IMO, that speaks as though God did choose for salvation...but really it's for purpose.

I disagree on both counts. It is not the only one by any stretch of the imagination, and it's not for his purpose, per se, but so that His purpose of election would continue, as verse 11 says.

...I was saying that God let's us know HOW to be saved and THOSE PERSONS that choose to be so will be the WHO.

Okay, so you're saying that He leaves it up to us, which is to say that it depends on us, which is antithetical to Romans 9:16.

The HOW instead the the WHO is very important to how scripture is written and how I understand it.

I say both are important, and we can't discount ~ in any way ~ either.

Grace and peace to you.