The map of calvinism

[civic]

Thank you, for your time in giving your short timeline of your journey. The Lord be with you. Are you seeking a job, or have you found one yet?

still looking thanks for asking.

 

[TibiasDad]

Doug, scripture must be understood as a cohesive whole, so going backward to Genesis where there is very little doctrine yet to be develop, as when it is in the beginning of the churches epistles, such as Romans, where the many doctrines are taught and expanded upon throughout the rest of the epistles to the churches to whom God would make known the mysteries of His truths.

Doctrine is both declared and demonstrated. As you have said, in Genesis 4 there was no “doctrine” per se, but doctrine was being expressed in living color in behavior and interaction between man and God.

It is unrecorded, yet axiomatic, that God has instructed man about sacrificial offerings to him, for Cain and Able, brought their offerings to God. And it would appear, based on the description of Abel’s offering being “fat portions from some of the firstborn of his flock”, that the instructions were foreshadowings of the tithe and first fruits commands that would come in later revelations.

These instructions were clear and understood, for Abel’s sacrifice was pleasing to God and Cain was told “Why are you angry? Why is your face downcast? If you do what is right, will you not be accepted?

This tells us that both Cain and Abel were capable and understood God’s instructions. We can say nothing more than this, but this fact is sufficient to say that the human condition as a whole was not totally unable. Whatever ability that was available, was so by grace. It is not a capacity that is merely a human strength, for sans grace, sin would completely dominate every act, every aspect of our lives. It is not a specific act of grace toward just one and not another, it is an irresistible, universal act of grace that enables all mankind the ability to respond to what God is doing.

So, by reading mainly the NT, (certain OT saints had knowledge, but limited, and not to the degree we have it in the NT) we see what made the difference between Abel and Cain, and it was not flesh and blood that made this different., but the grace of God to one and not to the other.

That is an esegetic conclusion.

Example would be Jacob and Esau~where in the NT Paul expanded upon this truth, so that men might know that salvation from sin and condemnation is not to him that willeth, or him that runneth, but of God, that shows mercy to whom He will and whom he will He hardeneth~not that God works in men's hearts to harden them, but he just leaves them to THEMSELVES and they are naturally harden by the own depraved hearts received from Adam.

I'll be more than happy to go to Romans 9 and expound upon this more in depth with you, if you would like to do so.

It is of God, and thus, by grace; that is why “is not to him that willeth, or him that runneth” It is impossible for God to be obligated to act in our behalf by anything we can do. If God acts, it is because he chooses to do so on his terms, because he wants to do it for his own reasons. Our works, desires, are irrelevant in as far as gaining God’s favor.

Secondly, regarding “God, that shows mercy to whom He will and whom he will He hardeneth”, these words are the preamble to the set up of his argument for why God is sending his gospel message to the Gentiles and seemingly leaving Israel behind. Paul is basically saying it is God’s sovereign right to send the gospel to whomever he chooses, and however he chooses. God can save Gentiles if he wants to do so; Israel is not exclusively chosen.

God is not teaching “Reformed Election” principles here, in fact it is countering the Jewish mentality that they were the only chosen people. A philosophy that was basically a “limited atonement” kind of argument. That God chose them to be his people, not the Gentiles. Which is why Paul says that “Not all who are Israel are Israel”, and again, “that a people who are not my people” become part of his people.


Doug

 

[Red Baker]

Doug, I'll post ASAP~at the moment I can hardly use my right side of my upper body, not sure what is wrong, if not better in a day or so,, then I'll call my doctor for an appointment. Thank for responding, and in the spirit in which you did, I just read it and will do so again shortly. RB

 

[atpollard]

Secondly, regarding “God, that shows mercy to whom He will and whom he will He hardeneth”, these words are the preamble to the set up of his argument for why God is sending his gospel message to the Gentiles and seemingly leaving Israel behind. Paul is basically saying it is God’s sovereign right to send the gospel to whomever he chooses, and however he chooses. God can save Gentiles if he wants to do so; Israel is not exclusively chosen.

Respectfully, why can Romans 9 not be both.

Paul seems to effortlessly transition between examples of "individuals" and "peoples", so why would any limitation on its applicability not be an artificial and external construct that WE added to God's message. God most certainly demonstrated that He could choose to save Gentiles as well as Jews [Even in the OT where we have stories like Rahab and Ruth]. God most certainly demonstrated that He can choose one person and not another [Peter and Judas, Jacob and Esau, Ishmael and Isaac, David and Saul, Saul/Paul plucked out of left field to be an Apostle].

We can debate the origin of every dot and tittle of grace and faith and belief until Jesus himself returns without a definitive resolution ... but we should be able to agree that God deals with both INDIVIDUALS (as individuals) and with GROUPS (as a group). Judgement fell on a nation and in Daniel we see a PEOPLE carried off into servitude, but God stood with three INDIVIDUALS in a fiery furnace. Is it so hard to imagine that if "Daniel" can deal with both that "Romans" can not speak of both as well.

 

[praise_yeshua]

But, let it be known, we believe that God has children in different mainline sects, EXCEPT for Mormons, JW, Islamic, and others like them that worship others gods, or, denies some of the cardinal truths concerning Christ.

God has children everywhere. The smallest grain of faith changes everything. There are many innocent people in this world that know nothing but what they were taught. They're a victim of other sinful men. God has mercy on the downtrodden and those deceived by their own brothers.

Do you know what the best thing a person can do in this life relative to God?

Just admit they don't know Him. That is faith. Job found this in his life a long time after calling on God.

Job 42:5 I have heard of thee by the hearing of the ear: but now mine eye seeth thee.
Job 42:6 Wherefore I abhor myself, and repent in dust and ashes.

There are many in this life that claim to know God intimately. What they believe about God is nothing like Him. These are called an IDOL...

Such idols are everywhere. Everywhere. There are many in this world in all sorts of circumstances that come realize they just don't what the Truth is. It is that small measure of faith that begins the journey to know God.

It is wonderful to be free enough to admit that "I know that I don't know"......

 

[TibiasDad]

Respectfully, why can Romans 9 not be both.

Paul seems to effortlessly transition between examples of "individuals" and "peoples", so why would any limitation on its applicability not be an artificial and external construct that WE added to God's message. God most certainly demonstrated that He could choose to save Gentiles as well as Jews [Even in the OT where we have stories like Rahab and Ruth]. God most certainly demonstrated that He can choose one person and not another [Peter and Judas, Jacob and Esau, Ishmael and Isaac, David and Saul, Saul/Paul plucked out of left field to be an Apostle].

None of these examples are about choosing one for salvation and one to be excluded from hope. These are all about roles not salvation for one and not the other. With Jacob and Esau it was a case of God choosing to not follow the primogeniture custom of human origin.

With Ishmael and Isaac, it was a matter of Abram not believing in God’s promises and trying to make things happen on his own.

David and Saul was a matter of the latter’s disobedience.

Peter and Judas don’t really apply here in my opinion; they made their own choices. Judas could have repented and been forgiven, and Peter could have done any number of things differently. That they didn’t doesn’t necessitate preordination, only foreknowledge.

The whole of Romans 9-11 is a broad explanation of God’s purpose of using the Gentiles to make the Jews jealous and repentant.”And so all Israel will be saved”!

Doug

 

[praise_yeshua]

Respectfully, why can Romans 9 not be both.

Paul seems to effortlessly transition between examples of "individuals" and "peoples", so why would any limitation on its applicability not be an artificial and external construct that WE added to God's message. God most certainly demonstrated that He could choose to save Gentiles as well as Jews [Even in the OT where we have stories like Rahab and Ruth]. God most certainly demonstrated that He can choose one person and not another [Peter and Judas, Jacob and Esau, Ishmael and Isaac, David and Saul, Saul/Paul plucked out of left field to be an Apostle].

So God didn't choose His Son. Jesus Christ?

Why are YOU trying to replace Him? You're not Him.

 

[TibiasDad]

Doug, I'll post ASAP~at the moment I can hardly use my right side of my upper body, not sure what is wrong, if not better in a day or so,, then I'll call my doctor for an appointment. Thank for responding, and in the spirit in which you did, I just read it and will do so again shortly. RB

Red,

I am sorry to hear this, and I can empathize with you as I have been dealing with MS since 1998.

May the Lord be with you and give you strength and wisdom to understand that even in this, God is working for your good!

Doug

 

[Handaan]

Doug, I'll post ASAP~at the moment I can hardly use my right side of my upper body, not sure what is wrong, if not better in a day or so,, then I'll call my doctor for an appointment. Thank for responding, and in the spirit in which you did, I just read it and will do so again shortly. RB

I'm praying for you and that you would get a doctor's appointment as soon as possible. Even if it does clear up in a day or two there must be an underlying cause and that sounds pretty serious.

In the name of Jesus we pray:

May God strengthen and bless you and heal you completely. Amen.

 

[Rockson]

Doug, I'll post ASAP~at the moment I can hardly use my right side of my upper body, not sure what is wrong, if not better in a day or so,, then I'll call my doctor for an appointment. Thank for responding, and in the spirit in which you did, I just read it and will do so again shortly. RB

RB stepping out here of our going back and forth with scripture might I encourage you to see a doctor right way. There could be a thing where time can be important in having it checked. I do hope and pray for your well being.

 

[atpollard]

The whole of Romans 9-11 is a broad explanation of God’s purpose of using the Gentiles to make the Jews jealous and repentant.”And so all Israel will be saved”!

Didn't really work, did it?

There was never a MASS REPENTANCE and conversion of Jews because Gentiles believed (at least that I am aware of). Acts mostly focuses on the growth of Gentile Christians and History mostly focuses on their persecution by Jews (followed by a turning of fortunes and Jewish persecution by Gentile Christians).

 

[atpollard]

None of these examples are about choosing one for salvation and one to be excluded from hope. These are all about roles not salvation for one and not the other. With Jacob and Esau it was a case of God choosing to not follow the primogeniture custom of human origin.

With Ishmael and Isaac, it was a matter of Abram not believing in God’s promises and trying to make things happen on his own.

David and Saul was a matter of the latter’s disobedience.

I could probably make an argument to counter this, but it is not worth it. Your answer suggests your mind is made up and the concept is decided for you. So I will let it pass in the interest of "shalom" (peace and well being).

 

[TibiasDad]

Didn't really work, did it?

There was never a MASS REPENTANCE and conversion of Jews because Gentiles believed (at least that I am aware of). Acts mostly focuses on the growth of Gentile Christians and History mostly focuses on their persecution by Jews (followed by a turning of fortunes and Jewish persecution by Gentile Christians).

The declaration is a prophetic statement about the eventual outcome.

Doug

 

[TibiasDad]

I could probably make an argument to counter this, but it is not worth it. Your answer suggests your mind is made up and the concept is decided for you. So I will let it pass in the interest of "shalom" (peace and well being).

If your objective is to convince me of the validity of your argument, then you are probably right. If, however, the goal is to have an honest conversation about our differences of opinion, your choice to withdraw is disappointing. There need not be a lack of peace and well being between anyone simply because of a lack of agreement. The choice is always yours to make, and I will respect your decision, but as for me, I am always open to honest dialogue.


Doug

 

[atpollard]

The declaration is a prophetic statement about the eventual outcome.

Doug

God and Paul sure are playing the LONG GAME on that one.

 

[atpollard]

If your objective is to convince me of the validity of your argument, then you are probably right. If, however, the goal is to have an honest conversation about our differences of opinion, your choice to withdraw is disappointing. There need not be a lack of peace and well being between anyone simply because of a lack of agreement. The choice is always yours to make, and I will respect your decision, but as for me, I am always open to honest dialogue.


Doug

Dialogs are most interesting when they SAY something new. I suspect that you and I would just retread the Romans 9 conversation with a few new verses inserted each time as we moved from example to example with identical presuppositions.

That sounds like less interesting, to me.

 

[TibiasDad]

Dialogs are most interesting when they SAY something new. I suspect that you and I would just retread the Romans 9 conversation with a few new verses inserted each time as we moved from example to example with identical presuppositions.

That sounds like less interesting, to me.

Like I said, it’s your choice, but I’m always ready and willing to begin again.

Doug

 

[TibiasDad]

God and Paul sure are playing the LONG GAME on that one.

Much of the NT is about the long game!


Doug

 

[Red Baker]

Doug, I'll post ASAP~at the moment I can hardly use my right side of my upper body, not sure what is wrong, if not better in a day or so,, then I'll call my doctor for an appointment. Thank for responding, and in the spirit in which you did, I just read it and will do so again shortly. RB

I believe I have a rotator cuff injury~I have a upcoming appointment coming very soon, then I'll know more.

 

[Red Baker]

God has children everywhere. The smallest grain of faith changes everything. There are many innocent people in this world that know nothing but what they were taught. They're a victim of other sinful men. God has mercy on the downtrodden and those deceived by their own brothers.

Do you know what the best thing a person can do in this life relative to God?

Just admit they don't know Him. That is faith. Job found this in his life a long time after calling on God.

Job 42:5 I have heard of thee by the hearing of the ear: but now mine eye seeth thee.
Job 42:6 Wherefore I abhor myself, and repent in dust and ashes.

There are many in this life that claim to know God intimately. What they believe about God is nothing like Him. These are called an IDOL...

Such idols are everywhere. Everywhere. There are many in this world in all sorts of circumstances that come realize they just don't what the Truth is. It is that small measure of faith that begins the journey to know God.

It is wonderful to be free enough to admit that "I know that I don't know"......

I'm marking this so I can come back later and post an answer to you.