Posted on 11/18/2011 6:13:09 AM PST by Alex Murphy
Next Thursday, as the rest of us tuck into our turkey feasts, hundreds of needy families in Southern California will open "Boxes of Love." Delivered by several churches led by Pacific Crossroads in Santa Monica, Calif., the boxes contain ingredients for a Thanksgiving meal for six. They allow impoverished families to skip food lines and neighborhood pantries and enjoy the holiday in their own homes.
What's unusual about the Pacific Crossroads congregation—and what underpins efforts such as Boxes of Love—is its theologically conservative raison d'être. A member church of the Presbyterian Church in America, Pacific Crossroads is committed to Reformation doctrines such as total depravity (every person is born sinful) and limited atonement (salvation is available only to the elect). These beliefs are typically regarded as ugly and inhumane by American culturati. Yet the church's pastor, Rankin Wilbourne, is happy to pepper his sermons with references to Bono and "Jersey Shore," and the church has grown to around 1,500 members from 500 in three years.
[SNIP]
And so in a city more often associated with Calvin Klein, John Calvin's teachings provide a basis for hope. In his commentary on II Corinthians 8, the 16th-century Swiss theologian connected Christians' assurance of salvation with their freedom to give to the poor:
"What makes us more close-handed than we ought to be is when we look too carefully, and too far forward, in contemplating the dangers that may occur—when we are excessively cautious and careful—when we calculate too narrowly what we will require during our whole life, or, in fine, how much we lose when the smallest portion is taken away. The man that depends upon the blessing of the Lord has his mind set free from these trammels and has, at the same time, his hands opened for beneficence."
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
The bible says that God is not a respecter of persons so it is a very good chance that their children and gradcildren are going to hell and there is not a thing the calvinist can do about it.
Isn't that a lovely picture of God?/sarc
Summary V.16 "It does not, therefore, depend on man's desire or effort, but on God's mercy...God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden."
It's not dependant on Israel's, man's or Pharaoh's desire or effort..."Israel", "man" and "Pharaoh" all subject to God's will.
Yes, WHO God chooses to save - those of faith, or those born in the flesh - is God’s prerogative. And Paul says God chooses to save those who follow Abraham in faith:
“1What then shall we say was gained by Abraham, our forefather according to the flesh? 2For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. 3For what does the Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness.”
“9Is this blessing then only for the circumcised, or also for the uncircumcised? We say that faith was counted to Abraham as righteousness. 10How then was it counted to him? Was it before or after he had been circumcised? It was not after, but before he was circumcised. 11 He received the sign of circumcision as a seal of the righteousness that he had by faith while he was still uncircumcised. The purpose was to make him the father of all who believe without being circumcised, so that righteousness would be counted to them as well, 12and to make him the father of the circumcised who are not merely circumcised but who also walk in the footsteps of the faith that our father Abraham had before he was circumcised.” - Chapter 4
and “8This 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.”
” 30What shall we say, then? That Gentiles who did not pursue righteousness have attained it, that is, a righteousness that is by faith; 31but that Israel who pursued a law that would lead to righteousness did not succeed in reaching that law. 32Why? Because they did not pursue it by faith, but as if it were based on works. They have stumbled over the stumbling stone, 33as it is written,
“Behold, I am laying in Zion a stone of stumbling, and a rock of offense;
and whoever believes in him will not be put to shame.”
At no time does Paul say in Chapter 9 that God picks men out by name to be saved - although God could, and who could argue? But God has chosen to save those who believe. And who is Calvin to tell God no?
“whoever believes in him will not be put to shame”
Subject. Verb. Whoever. Believes.
Not “to whom God gives belief”. It is an active sentence, not a passive one.
Please go back and read ALL of chapter 9, and maybe even ALL of Romans. Read what Paul says - his entire argument.
I have read it...many times.
Paul is very strong on God's sovereignty...that's one reason he emphasized predestination in Egph 1. Another reason is for the saints' assurance. Salvation does not depend on what they've done...if that was so they could disbelieve as well as believe their own way into Heaven. Faith is from God as Paul discovered when Jesus knocked him from His horse to convince him of truth. When God grants faith, He never removes it. A saint is granted by God to remain in Heaven forever.
True. But Man can choose to reject it.
You have no argument from me.
Why would God *need* to convince Paul of anything? Could it be because God chooses not to override our free will?
So if one didn't do as God said the other wouldn't ever be saved? Not according to point 4, the elect will be saved no matter what. In fact, if you truly believe point 4, an “elect” can refuse.
Can’t not can
If I didn't make myself clear, forgive me. It is His plan for us, for all men who will trust Christ's atonement for our sins. Whether it is men before the Cross, at this time, or in the ages to come. The Cross was, is, and will always be God's plan for mankind. Planned before the foundation of the world.
Please show me where God gives saving faith to someone, in scripture.
Yes, God is sovereign, and Calvin has no right to deny God His will. Paul clearly says that God has chosen those who follow Abraham:
“3For what does the Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness.” 4Now to the one who works, his wages are not counted as a gift but as his due. 5And to the one who does not work but believes in him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted as righteousness...”
Abraham. Subject. Believed. Verb. This means Abraham believed, not that Abraham was given belief.
“The purpose was to make him the father of all who believe without being circumcised, so that righteousness would be counted to them as well, 12and to make him the father of the circumcised who are not merely circumcised but who also walk in the footsteps of the faith that our father Abraham had before he was circumcised.”
Please tell me, what is passive about “who also walk in the footsteps of the faith that our father Abraham had”?
“16That is why it depends on faith, in order that the promise may rest on grace and be guaranteed to all his offspring—not only to the adherent of the law but also to the one who shares the faith of Abraham, who is the father of us all, 17as it is written, “I have made you the father of many nations”—in the presence of the God in whom he believed, who gives life to the dead and calls into existence the things that do not exist. 18In hope he believed against hope, that he should become the father of many nations...”
Abraham was active. He is the subject, and believe is the verb. Abraham DOES it. It is not done to him.
In Chapter 9, Paul writes
“6But it is not as though the word of God has failed. For not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel, 7and not all are children of Abraham because they are his offspring, but “Through Isaac shall your offspring be named.” 8This 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.”
His argument is that the children of the promise are not those born of Abraham’s flesh, the Jews, but those who follow his example of faith.
30What shall we say, then? That Gentiles who did not pursue righteousness have attained it, that is, a righteousness that is by faith; 31but that Israel who pursued a law that would lead to righteousness did not succeed in reaching that law. 32Why? Because they did not pursue it by faith, but as if it were based on works. They have stumbled over the stumbling stone, 33as it is written,
“Behold, I am laying in Zion a stone of stumbling, and a rock of offense;
and whoever believes in him will not be put to shame.”
WHOEVER BELIEVES. Not a list of names, but whoever believes.
Whoever. Subject.
Believes. Verb.
Not passive, and not receiving, but acting in faith.
YEP
This post sent me into fits of laughter earlier today. Every single Calvinist I know - every single one - can quote Romans 9 from memory.
“Every single Calvinist I know - every single one - can quote Romans 9 from memory.”
Then it is a pity the Calvinists do not understand paragraphs, and instead substitute out-of-context sentences.
Perhaps you will oblige me by explaining what Paul’s argument is in Chapter 9. Romans 3 is about justification by faith. What is 9 about?
What became evident to me when I was a Protestant is what is or is not Biblical is in the eye of the beholder.
Each Protestant sect claims that the Bible alone is its authority.
The Lutheran Augsburg Confession says one thing about grace and baptism, while the Calvinist Belgic, Helvetic, and Westminster Confessions contradict it.
And then you have the confessions of faith such those composed by Baptist theologians that contradict both Lutheran and Calvinist propositions.
I posit this is why Protestantism has been completely ineffective in combating secularism. Protestants can’t even agree among themselves what is and what is not Biblical.
Formerly Protestant countries in Europe have far higher percentages of atheism than those that are either Catholic or Orthodox.
Only the Eastern Orthodox lands really have staved off aggressive secularism.
America’s Protestant fundamentalism stands as an anomaly.
The fact is the nations of Europe and the regions of the United States where Calvinism historically was dominant are now the most secular.
What then is it about Calvinism that led to its making the culture fertile for the rise of strong anti-Christian movements?
This is true even in France where Calvinistic-tinged Catholicism called Jansenism took root before the French Revolution.
France also had a sizeable Calvinist population prior to the revolution.
My FRiend, you are fixated on the English breaks in chapters and verses. Read your posts, “Here is what chap. 3 is about, what is 9 about?” as if they are repair manuals on a refrigerator and a stove. Paul is arguing the need and means of our rescue by grace throughout the book, principally to stop the rancor between the Jewish believers and the non-Jewish believers. As in other places, the Jewish believers had a tough time not feeling superior to the Gentile believers and Paul simply leveled the ground. Now, go back and read the entire book, and notice God’s grace operates first from Him to us, in a non-transaction method everywhere...and chap. 9.
We are broken beyond repair and no one, repeat no one seeks God (chap. 3) If He did not reach to you, you would not believe (chap. 4). There is the argument of Paul and it requires God to have done the planning, the election, and the application (chap. 8). Then you woke up and found you had been granted mercy (chap. 9) and some have been hardened and left out (chap. 9).
If the Gospel is the semi-pelagian world you describe, then the Reformation was no better than the self-righteous Catholicism it repudiated. You note yourself that Paul is addressing all believers who make up the real Israel “For not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel,...but the children of the promise are counted as offspring.” This is not about “corporate” anything since he could not go on and single out Pharaoh as getting the “hardening” card and another man as getting mercy. Clearly, Paul is speaking individually and you, my FRiend, have morphed this into your denominational party line.
Eastern Orthodox is a good Christian root, too.
I don't think ANY are as God would have his church.
However, keep in mind, the Bible says they shall know you not by “they all agree”, but “their love for one another”.
There would be no need for Protestantism if the church had not been corrupted and taken over by the enemy. Think about it — The enemy WANTS to take over the church — he already has the secularists.
We won't convert the world by being good examples and agreeing amongst ourselves. We SHOULD do what the bible says — preach the Word, care for our fellow man, and love one another. All else is noise.
Here is pure religion - to visit the sick and those in prison, and take care of the widows. (roughly James 1:27). God is a judge of the heart.
As far as comparing Protestantism vs Orthodox vs Catholic, I believe there are saved individuals in each. However, each takes too high a view of their place in God's economy. Reminds me of the disciples arguing who is the greater. Useless, petty, and embarrassing.
Chapter 9 is simply an easy way of pointing out that section. It is the Calvinists who quote one verse, and claim it is the entire argument.
“Then you woke up and found you had been granted mercy (chap. 9) and some have been hardened and left out (chap. 9).”
No, that is not what is in Chapter 9. The Jewish complaint is that God had been unfaithful. He promised the Jews they were the Chosen People, and now Paul was saying it was FAITH that matters.
Paul answers that objection in Chapter 9. I’ll use the Good News Translation, so Calvinists can follow multiple sentences easier:
First, Paul assures them he is still a Jew and that he loves his fellow Jews:
” 1 I am speaking the truth; I belong to Christ and I do not lie. My conscience, ruled by the Holy Spirit, also assures me that I am not lying2 when I say how great is my sorrow, how endless the pain in my heart3 for my people, my own flesh and blood! For their sake I could wish that I myself were under God’s curse and separated from Christ.4 They are God’s people; he made them his children and revealed his glory to them; he made his covenants with them and gave them the Law; they have the true worship; they have received God’s promises;5 they are descended from the famous Hebrew ancestors; and Christ, as a human being, belongs to their race. May God, who rules over all, be praised forever! Amen.”
Next, Paul restates his argument used in Chapter 4:
“6 I am not saying that the promise of God has failed; for not all the people of Israel are the people of God.7 Nor are all of Abraham’s descendants the children of God. God said to Abraham,
It is through Isaac that you will have the descendants I promised you.8 This means that the children born in the usual way are not the children of God; instead, the children born as a result of God’s promise are regarded as the true descendants.9 For God’s promise was made in these words:
At the right time I will come back, and Sarah will have a son.”
He is arguing that Christians - Jewish or Gentile - are the heirs of God’s promise to Abraham. This repeats in another form what he said earlier:
” Abraham believed God, and because of his faith God accepted him as righteous.10 When did this take place? Was it before or after Abraham was circumcised? It was before, not after.11 He was circumcised later, and his circumcision was a sign to show that because of his faith God had accepted him as righteous before he had been circumcised. And so Abraham is the spiritual father of all who believe in God and are accepted as righteous by him, even though they are not circumcised.12 He is also the father of those who are circumcised, that is, of those who, in addition to being circumcised, also live the same life of faith that our father Abraham lived before he was circumcised.”
Paul now shows God can give the promise as he wishes:
“10 And this is not all. For Rebecca’s two sons had the same father, our ancestor Isaac.11-12But in order that the choice of one son might be completely the result of God’s own purpose, God said to her,
The older will serve the younger. He said this before they were born, before they had done anything either good or bad; so God’s choice was based on his call, and not on anything they had done.13 As the scripture says,
I loved Jacob, but I hated Esau.”
That he is not using Jacob & Esau as individuals is shown by quoting Malachi, 1500 years after the individual. The Jews of Paul’s day understood they were benefiting from God counting Jacob’s line in the promise, and not counting Esau’s line. They had not complained when they thought that, but now they felt rejected because Paul was emphasizing faith rather than bloodlines.
So Paul goes on:
” 14 Shall we say, then, that God is unjust? Not at all.15 For he said to Moses,
I will have mercy on anyone I wish; I will take pity on anyone I wish.16 So then, everything depends, not on what we humans want or do, but only on God’s mercy.17 For the scripture says to the king of Egypt,
I made you king in order to use you to show my power and to spread my fame over the whole world.18 So then, God has mercy on anyone he wishes, and he makes stubborn anyone he wishes.”
Calvinists like that last verse, but it needs to be kept in context. Paul is not suggesting that all Jews are hardened, for he is himself a Jew. Individuals will come to Christ from anywhere, but the Jews (collectively) have fallen.
This next section again is popular with Calvinists, but it is not about individual salvation, but the paths of salvation:
“19 But one of you will say to me,
If this is so, how can God find fault with anyone? Who can resist God’s will?20 But who are you, my friend, to talk back to God? A clay pot does not ask the man who made it,
Why did you make me like this?21 After all, the man who makes the pots has the right to use the clay as he wishes, and to make two pots from the same lump of clay, one for special occasions and the other for ordinary use.
22 And the same is true of what God has done. He wanted to show his anger and to make his power known. But he was very patient in enduring those who were the objects of his anger, who were doomed to destruction.23 And he also wanted to reveal his abundant glory, which was poured out on us who are the objects of his mercy, those of us whom he has prepared to receive his glory.24 For we are the people he called, not only from among the Jews but also from among the Gentiles.”
If God chooses to call people of faith his own, who can object? The people who claimed it of blood? But that claim is what is blinding them, and provoking God’s wrath! They are busy claiming blood, and saying God has an obligation to them, and missing the point.
And yes, God WILL harden the hearts of those who have seen the truth, and refuse it. As Paul wrote in chapter 1:
“So those people have no excuse at all!21 They know God, but they do not give him the honor that belongs to him, nor do they thank him. Instead, their thoughts have become complete nonsense, and their empty minds are filled with darkness.22 They say they are wise, but they are fools;23 instead of worshiping the immortal God, they worship images made to look like mortals or birds or animals or reptiles.
24 And so God has given those people over to do the filthy things...They exchange the truth about God for a lie...Because they do this, God has given them over to shameful passions...Because those people refuse to keep in mind the true knowledge about God, he has given them over to corrupted minds”
This is what is happening to the Jews. Claiming their bloodlines obligates God, they try to force God to keep a bargain without understanding what bargain God made with Abraham.
So now Paul goes on to show the Jews that God had warned them by the Prophets:
“25 This is what he says in the book of Hosea:
The people who were not mine
I will call
My People.
The nation that I did not love
I will call
My Beloved.
26 And in the very place where they were told,
You are not my people,
there they will be called the children of the living God.
27 And Isaiah exclaims about Israel:
Even if the people of Israel are as many as the grains of sand by the sea, yet only a few of them will be saved;28 for the Lord will quickly settle his full account with the world.
29 It is as Isaiah had said before,
If the Lord Almighty had not left us some descendants, we would have become like Sodom, we would have been like Gomorrah.”
God had warned them to repent, because only a remnant of the Jews would be saved.
Paul then places the fact before them:
“30 So we say that the Gentiles, who were not trying to put themselves right with God, were put right with him through faith;31 while God’s people, who were seeking a law that would put them right with God, did not find it.32 And why not? Because they did not depend on faith but on what they did. And so they stumbled over the
stumbling stone33 that the scripture speaks of:
Look, I place in Zion a stone
that will make people stumble,
a rock that will make them fall.
But whoever believes in him will not be disappointed.”
Why have the Jews fallen? Why did they not recognize the Christ? Because they are relying on a ‘promise’ to reward those born of Abraham’s blood, and are unwilling to accept the requirement for faith.
The start of the next chapter is, IMHO, the summary of this chapter:
“1 My friends, how I wish with all my heart that my own people might be saved! How I pray to God for them!2 I can assure you that they are deeply devoted to God; but their devotion is not based on true knowledge.3 They have not known the way in which God puts people right with himself, and instead, they have tried to set up their own way; and so they did not submit themselves to God’s way of putting people right.”
As long as Jews reject the need for faith, they will be rejected by God. They cannot force God to save them “by grace thru bloodlines”, anymore than someone can be saved “by grace thru election”. It is “by grace thru faith”, as Paul has said repeatedly in this letter, and in others.
Paul is not saying God has a list of names somewhere, and that he irresistibly saves those on the list, and utterly damns those who are not. He is contrasting two ways of approaching God: Bloodlines and faith. And if someone demands that God accept them because of their bloodlines, saying God made a promise, then they are screwed. They have misunderstood the promise of God and failed to pay attention to what God really WAS promising. They need, like all others, to repent and believe.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.