Saved Or Predestined ???

[Tong2020]

Where did I say God would not do according to his will and purpose? I just said that the overall point was that God could work out his plan by any means he chooses.
The question of whether God was righteous comes because apparently some were doubting that God was truly keeping his promises. Paul is saying, in essence, just because God didn't work in the expected way doesn't mean he hasn't been faithful. God hasn't failed because most of his people rejected him. The children of the promise are all those who believe, Jew and gentle alike.

I wonder why when you quote my post, they are most of the time incomplete.

Anyway, you said "Paul is saying, in essence, just because God didn't work in the expected way doesn't mean he hasn't been faithful." What is that expected way that you say there? If you have a reference in scriptures please cite it.

You said "The children of the promise are all those who believe, Jew and gentle alike." Why do Paul says of the children of God, as "children of promise"? Do you know the significance of that?

Tong
R0528

 

[kcnalp]

Ezekiel 36
26 I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit within you; I will take the heart of stone out of your flesh and give you a heart of flesh.
27 I will put My Spirit within you and cause you to walk in My statutes, and you will keep My judgments and do them.

 

[JunChosen]

BTW, where the script has all been written and all my sins are caused by God

It is in the Bible of course.

You are in error! God created the universe and therein, "good" that is perfect. Sin is man's doing. This is the problem with the world, they blame God for their sins. They clench their fists towards heaven and blame God because they are going to hell, instead of admitting they are going to hell because they are sinners.

"Choose this day whom we will serve."

Even this phrase God gave to Joshua to utter. Just as Jesus said to Peter in Matthew 16:17.

But, here in the real world, what we do is actually our choice. We actually choose our fate. God gives us free will to "Choose this day whom we will serve."

Yes, you can go to bed at anytime you choose, wake up anytime and eat whatever breakfast you like, wear any color suit to work...etc., but you can't choose for God because you are spiritually dead and a corps has no life in him.

Natural disasters? There are no such things in your determinism.

Correct, only in your world will you call evil, natural disasters. So I quote.

Everything is fated, remember? If I go out and kill my neighbor and steal his wife, that's what God fated me to do.

Again you blame God for something you do naturally. The heart of man is desperately evil, who can know it?

To God Be The Glory

 

[Renniks]

So the salvation of God, among other things, includes the giving of faith which man had lost, the deliverance from the power of death and from out of a corrupted state, and so then the giving of life lost, even eternal life.

With regards salvation, faith does not come before salvation, as if to say that salvation comes about because of faith or faith causes one's salvation. Rather, as part of the salvation of God, faith is just one among that which God will give the man whom He saves on the onset of His salvation work.

No, we are given the ability to have faith, but we must exercise that ability. Yes faith is first then salvation. By grace through faith means faith is a cause of salvation. Although salvation itself is a gift, it is conditional on faith.
"in the gospel the righteousness of God is revealed--a righteousness that is by faith from first to last, just as it is written: "The righteous will live by faith."

" without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who comes to him must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who earnestly seek him."

 

[Renniks]

In context, Paul was not talking about that, but about God's election of Jacob over Esau. Error comes about when one take the verses out of context, such as you do here. Even while it may be said that Jacob represents one nation and Esau another, such matter is irrelevant to what Paul is saying in Romans 9. Stick to the context as I did in my post #1425, 1427, 1428, and you will do well.

Tong
R0526

I am in context. The context is the explanation of how God brought about the plan of salvation.
Paul is referring to this verse:

"The LORD said to her, "Two nations are in your womb, and two peoples from within you will be separated; one people will be stronger than the other, and the older will serve the younger."

 

[Renniks]

Jacob was not chosen as head of Israel Renniks. Jacob is Israel, whose descendants later would be known to be the nation of Israel. Jacob did not get to live to see his descendants made into the nation Israel by God, much less be chosen as the head of Israel.

You said "If Jacob had totally failed God could have worked with someone else, but God obviously knew Jacob was the one for the job." Tell us, how did Jacob accomplish the job given him as you contend?

And as I said, the job of making the prophecy concerning the Messiah to happen as prophesied is God's and could not be assigned to Jacob as you contend. Paul, in Romans 9, simply tells us concerning Jacob, that God had chosen him over Esau, to be from out of whom God will make a nation of people to be His people in keeping with His promise to Abraham, and that God's election is based not of works of Jacob and Esau, but of Him who calls, that is, God. Jacob had nothing at all to do in bringing about the making of his descendants into becoming a nation, the nation Israel nor in bringing about the promise of God to Abraham.

Tong
R0527

You are nitpicking. Stay on point. The point is that this choosing was not for salvation. We don't know if Esau was eventually saved or not. It was choosing who would be head of the nation. You are trying to make it about God choosing Esau for hell and Jacob for eternal life.

 

[Renniks]

Ezekiel 36
26 I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit within you; I will take the heart of stone out of your flesh and give you a heart of flesh.
27 I will put My Spirit within you and cause you to walk in My statutes, and you will keep My judgments and do them.

Was this promise unconditional? Did everyone that was Israel receive this promise?

 

[Renniks]

You are in error! God created the universe and therein, "good" that is perfect. Sin is man's doing. This is the problem with the world, they blame God for their sins. They clench their fists towards heaven and blame God because they are going to hell, instead of admitting they are going to hell because they are sinners

Oh so now the script isn't all written for us after all! Make up your mind. If the script is all written for us, that obviously includes all our sinning. You can't have it both ways.

 

[Renniks]

Again you blame God for something you do naturally. The heart of man is desperately evil, who can know it?

Again make up your mind. Either it's fated or it's not. I can not do anything " naturally" if my every action and thought is pre chosen.

 

[kcnalp]

Was this promise unconditional? Did everyone that was Israel receive this promise?

Romans 11:25-27
25 For I do not desire, brethren, that you should be ignorant of this mystery, lest you should be wise in your own opinion, that blindness in part has happened to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in.
26 And so all Israel will be saved, as it is written: "The Deliverer will come out of Zion, And He will turn away ungodliness from Jacob;
27 For this is My covenant with them, When I take away their sins."

 

[Tong2020]

No, we are given the ability to have faith, but we must exercise that ability. Yes faith is first then salvation. By grace through faith means faith is a cause of salvation. Although salvation itself is a gift, it is conditional on faith.
"in the gospel the righteousness of God is revealed--a righteousness that is by faith from first to last, just as it is written: "The righteous will live by faith."

" without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who comes to him must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who earnestly seek him."

You said "No, we are given the ability to have faith, but we must exercise that ability." And while you say that, you really have no scriptural basis, right? Right. Adam, before the fall had faith in God, until he lost it. It's faith that Adam lost, not the ability to have faith.

You said "Yes faith is first then salvation." I already have shown that in my post that that is not the case.

You said "By grace through faith means faith is a cause of salvation." No sir. Faith is not a cause of salvation. As I said, it is part of the salvation of God, not the cause. The cause of salvation is God, not faith. For it is God who saves and therefore the cause of it.

You said "Although salvation itself is a gift, it is conditional on faith." Base on the above, this is shown to be another false teaching.

You said ""in the gospel the righteousness of God is revealed--a righteousness that is by faith from first to last, just as it is written: "The righteous will live by faith."" Take note, it speaks of the righteousness OF God that is revealed, not of man. Another of your misuse of scriptures there.

Tong
R0529

 

[Tong2020]

I am in context. The context is the explanation of how God brought about the plan of salvation.
Paul is referring to this verse:

"The LORD said to her, "Two nations are in your womb, and two peoples from within you will be separated; one people will be stronger than the other, and the older will serve the younger."

Sorry sir, but no. You are clearly out of context. For what does that have to do with what Paul was saying concerning God's election of Jacob over Esau? None. As I said, error comes about when one take the verses out of context.

Tong
R0530

 

[Renniks]

Romans 11:25-27
25 For I do not desire, brethren, that you should be ignorant of this mystery, lest you should be wise in your own opinion, that blindness in part has happened to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in.
26 And so all Israel will be saved, as it is written: "The Deliverer will come out of Zion, And He will turn away ungodliness from Jacob;
27 For this is My covenant with them, When I take away their sins."

So, you take this to mean every individual Jew is automatically saved? What need is there for a Savior for Israel then?

 

[Tong2020]

You are nitpicking. Stay on point.

Not nitpicking sir, but trying to comment on every false statement you make that I find deserving to be refuted.

You were the one who speak of a JOB that God gave to Jacob. So, are you now running away from this? Just say so, else, you have the responsibility to answer the question. That is, if you want to be honest in this exchange.

You said "If Jacob had totally failed God could have worked with someone else, but God obviously knew Jacob was the one for the job." Tell us, how did Jacob accomplish the job given him as you contend?

It was choosing who would be head of the nation.

As I pointed out, Jacob was not chosen as head of Israel Renniks. Jacob is Israel, whose descendants later would be known to be the nation of Israel. Jacob did not get to live to see his descendants made into the nation Israel by God, much less be chosen as the head of Israel.

The point is that this choosing was not for salvation. We don't know if Esau was eventually saved or not.

You contend that "The point is that this choosing was not for salvation. We don't know if Esau was eventually saved or not." I ask, if the election was not for the purpose of salvation, please SHOW us what purpose was it for? Concerning Esau, did not God said He hated Esau? That's right, God did. What does that sound to you?

You are trying to make it about God choosing Esau for hell and Jacob for eternal life.

I was clear, that it is about God's election over Esau, that God is sovereign and will do according to His will and purpose. And that God's election, as it was in the case of Isaac, is not based on what good or evil Jacob or Esau have done. And that by and according to God's election, the purpose of God will surely not fail and will be accomplished.

Tong
R0531

 

[Renniks]

You said "No, we are given the ability to have faith, but we must exercise that ability." And while you say that, you really have no scriptural basis, right? Right. Adam, before the fall had faith in God, until he lost it. It's faith that Adam lost, not the ability to have faith.

You said "Yes faith is first then salvation." I already have shown that in my post that that is not the case.

You said "By grace through faith means faith is a cause of salvation." No sir. Faith is not a cause of salvation. As I said, it is part of the salvation of God, not the cause. The cause of salvation is God, not faith. For it is God who saves and therefore the cause of it.

You said "Although salvation itself is a gift, it is conditional on faith." Base on the above, this is shown to be another false teaching.

You said ""in the gospel the righteousness of God is revealed--a righteousness that is by faith from first to last, just as it is written: "The righteous will live by faith."" Take note, it speaks of the righteousness OF God that is revealed, not of man. Another of your misuse of scriptures there.

Tong
R0529

For those who don't understand Calvinism, take a good look at Tong's post here and what it actually means. It means that God has faith in God and that saves people, well, only some people, who God decides to have faith in himself for. Is this what scripture says? No, it says that without faith no man can please God. If God is the one having faith, this makes no sense whatsoever and why would anyone read the Bible this way? It's totally backward.
Tong claims he shows that faith comes after salvation. But what does scripture say:
12But to all who did receive Him, to those who believed in His name, He gave the right to become children of God— 13children born not of blood, nor of the desire or will of man, but born of God.…

First, receive and believe and then become a child of God, and yes, God does all the work of salvation, but as this verse shows he will not do that work unless one receives and believes on him first.
This is basic stuff that scripture says over and over and yet Calvinists consistently deny the obvious.

 

[Renniks]

Sorry sir, but no. You are clearly out of context. For what does that have to do with what Paul was saying concerning God's election of Jacob over Esau? None. As I said, error comes about when one take the verses out of context.

Tong
R0530

What does it have to do with Jacob over Esau? I just explained that.
"The LORD said to her, "Two nations are in your womb, and two peoples from within you will be separated; one people will be stronger than the other, and the older will serve the younger."

The election here is to them being elected to be the start of two nations. It's plain as day if you cross-reference Paul's line of thought with the Torah.

 

[Tong2020]

So, you take this to mean every individual Jew is automatically saved? What need is there for a Savior for Israel then?

Read:

Romans 9: 6 But it is not that the word of God has taken no effect. For they are not all Israel who are of Israel, 7 nor are they all children because they are the seed of Abraham; but, “In Isaac your seed shall be called.” 8 That is, those who are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God; but the children of the promise are counted as the seed.

Israel are the children of promise.

Tong
R0532

 

[Renniks]

You contend that "The point is that this choosing was not for salvation. We don't know if Esau was eventually saved or not." I ask, if the election was not for the purpose of salvation, please SHOW us what purpose was it for?

Lol, I already explained this multiple times. If you insist on being thick, fine. Everyone else reading has already understood the obvious.

Go back and reread verses 1-5. Physical, national Israel has clearly been the topic of Paul's and his readers' shared concern. Now, in these verses, Paul turns his attention to two specific cases, as examples of his previous point. Unfortunately, the Calvinist begins reading here - without the benefit of the previous context. So, although the passage never mentions salvation, the Calvinist assumes that the discussion pertains to the predetermined, unconditional election of individuals unto salvation, specifically Jacob over Esau. However, the context proves the discussion is focused on the judgment of the Israelite nation.

Who was in Rebecca's womb? She was carrying two individuals, yes. But, God foresaw two nations, two peoples, and He clearly informs Rebecca of that truth. It is from this vantage point that God foretells her that the "the older shall serve the younger". In other words, the nation that descended from the older brother would serve the nation that descended from the younger brother. This passage offers no prophesy regarding the two brothers as individuals.
In their lifetimes, Jacob came far closer to serving Esau, than Esau ever came to serving Jacob. Therefore, if this prophecy referred to the individuals, it failed! Since God’s prophecies cannot fail, this prophecy of the younger’s supremacy must not be referring to individuals.

And in case you think this is the only place God refers to Esau and Jacob as nations:

The burden of the word of the LORD to Israel by Malachi. "I have loved you," says the LORD. "Yet you say, 'In what way have You loved us?' Was not Esau Jacob's brother?" Says the LORD. "Yet Jacob I have loved; But Esau I have hated, And laid waste his mountains and his heritage For the jackals of the wilderness." Even though Edom has said, "We have been impoverished, But we will return and build the desolate places," Thus says the LORD of hosts: "They may build, but I will throw down; They shall be called the Territory of Wickedness, And the people against whom the LORD will have indignation forever. (Malachi 1:1-4)

The Edomites, descendents of Esau, were a "people against whom" God’s wrath and indignation moved. They were "hated", because they were wicked. However, this "hatred" is not absolute, but relative. The word, "hatred", is only raised in contrast with God’s "love" for the people of Jacob. (Please, recall that the Edomites were blessed with land and nation as well. Also, compare to Jesus’ usage of "hatred" toward family relative to the required "love" for Him, Luke 14:26.) In this quoted context of Malachi 1, the ultimate distinction between Esau and Jacob was that God spared a remnant from Jacob's seed, through whom came the Messiah, but Esau's seed were destroyed. This context shows applicability to the role of the nations, not the salvation of the original fathers.

 

[Renniks]

Read:

Romans 9: 6 But it is not that the word of God has taken no effect. For they are not all Israel who are of Israel, 7 nor are they all children because they are the seed of Abraham; but, “In Isaac your seed shall be called.” 8 That is, those who are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God; but the children of the promise are counted as the seed.

Israel are the children of promise.

Tong
R0532

And the Children of promise are those who pursue God by means of faith.

30 What then shall we say? That the Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, have obtained it, a righteousness that is by faith; 31 but the people of Israel, who pursued the law as the way of righteousness, have not attained their goal. 32 Why not? Because they pursued it not by faith but as if it were by works. They stumbled over the stumbling stone. 33 As it is written:

“See, I lay in Zion a stone that causes people to stumble
and a rock that makes them fall,
and the one who believes in him will never be put to shame.”[

In your system, if someone doesn't have faith, it's God fault for not giving it to him irresistibly. But that would make these verses meaningless.

 

[Tong2020]

For those who don't understand Calvinism, take a good look at Tong's post here and what it actually means. It means that God has faith in God and that saves people, well, only some people, who God decides to have faith in himself for. Is this what scripture says? No, it says that without faith no man can please God. If God is the one having faith, this makes no sense whatsoever and why would anyone read the Bible this way? It's totally backward.

Never said anything to that effect sir. Is that how you comprehend my post? I wonder where that is coming from.

Tong claims he shows that faith comes after salvation.

Please show where I said that in my post, else that will be a lying.

But what does scripture say:
12But to all who did receive Him, to those who believed in His name, He gave the right to become children of God— 13children born not of blood, nor of the desire or will of man, but born of God.…

First, receive and believe and then become a child of God, and yes, God does all the work of salvation, but as this verse shows he will not do that work unless one receives and believes on him first.
This is basic stuff that scripture says over and over and yet Calvinists consistently deny the obvious.

A clear misuse of scriptures again. Read verse 13 of the scriptures you quoted which tells us about the person of those mentioned in verse 12, telling us that they are children born not of blood, nor of the desire or will of man, but born of God.

Tong
R0533