Posted on 01/20/2002 5:02:48 PM PST by CCWoody
Jerry, I disagree with it. I don't condemn it. Condemnation is personal. It's impossible for me not to recognize you and your other "tag team members" as sincere, beloved, real Christians.
Neither do I condemn thee.
Before this is finished, God will have us being friends.
I thank you for standing up for the literal interpretation of any portion of scripture, even if I disagree with your interpretation. I pray that God always force me to look at what he says rather than to see what he says through any lens of my own philosophy or theology.
However, when have I, or any of the other members of the "tag team" stated that we did not choose Christ? Of course we did. May I suggest a good little book on the subject? Evangelism and the Sovereignty of God by J.I. Packer. You can pick up a copy here for about $9.00. It is a quick read, and, while not perfect, does a good job of explaining that Calvinists are not anti-evangelistic. We expect men to decide for Christ, we plead with them to do so.
However, we recognize that our witness must be accompanied by the work of the Holy Spirit in regeneration before a lost sinner wants to choose Christ. What most non-Calvinists dont' understand is just how far man fell in Adam, and what it means (being literal here) to be "dead in trespasses and sins".
An interesting point for you to ponder here. Most of us have been where you are. I certainly started out as a "Calminian" or "One pointer" in that I have always affirmed eternal security as a Baptist. However, it was my continued study of the words of Scripture itself that led me to where I am today. I truly believe that all of us are Arminian at conversion, at least this is what I have seen demonstated in my life and the lives of many others. I didn't become a Calvinist by reading Calvin, I became a Calvinist by reading Scripture.
Brothers aren't always on the friendliest of terms. However most brothers, even in a strained relationship, will defend to the death their brother from an outsider. Isn't that right, brother?
Yes. It is true.
God is a respector of His Glory and Purposes and Determined Counsel and Pleasure. Some men are the beneficiary of His Glory and Purpose and Determined Counsel and Pleasure. Others are not. "Egypt was a ransom for Israel; Ethiopia and Seba in her place" (Isaiah 43:3). BTW, the Gospel itself contains some of the strongest language that God never intended to save some...
And all those who never got a chance to ever hear the Gospel certainly seem to be negatively impacted as well.
I really do need to finish my "little" post on the Goal of God in Redemptive History.
(Ball in your court)
Racketball or tennis? lol.
Woody, forgetting everything else, just for a moment, would you please "translate" the line "God does not show favortism."
Seriously, without reference to any other scripture or theology, what do the words of that sentence mean?
And you are certain that they got none? I maintain that their judgement will be based on their observance of nature and their world that there is a Creator and their subsequent acceptance of that. But since my salvation doesn't hinge on that question, it's not important to me.
I wish I was as infallible as you claim to be....
Hmmm, that phrase does not appear to be in the Bible. What is found there is: ...God is no respecter of persons, and this is used in a decidedly racial way (i.e. men from all nations are brought to salvation) by Peter in Acts 10:34, and is not related to individual salvation.
However, even if we are to accept "no respecter of persons" to apply to individuals, it is easily seen that this cannot be talking about equal opportunity or equal access, as we can so readily see in the world around us. God is "no respecter of persons" in that He is not beholden to respect any individual, seeing as all are completely rebellious and "dead in trespasses and sins". he does not choose based on merit, but despite the fact that we are all totally worthless and lost. He chooses not with respect to our merit, but solely on the basis of His good pleasure.
Do you truly believe that "God does not show favoritism"? If so, how is it that I was born where I was, and enjoy the fruits of a Christian heritage, while others are born into heathen, pagan cultures of darkness?
And you are certain that they got none? I maintain that their judgement will be based on their observance of nature and their world that there is a Creator and their subsequent acceptance of that. But since my salvation doesn't hinge on that question, it's not important to me."
I hear this a lot. Quite often, as a matter of fact. However, these sentiments are indicative of one fact: Calvinism is truly evangelistic, while Arminianism really isn't. Now, before I am burned at the stake, let me explain.
See, if men really have the ability to find God, and if they are basically good at heart (and not "dead" spiritually) then maybe the heathen in the wilds will please God by his sincere search for meaning. Why would we want to give them a chance to reject the "foolishness" of the Gospel by presenting it to him? After all, men are only accountable for the truth they receive, or at least this is what we are led to believe. Maybe it would be better for him to never hear and have a chance at salvation than it would be for him to be damned by rejecting the Gospel.
However, the Calvinist knows that men are dead without Christ, and that it is only by the preaching of the Gospel that men are saved. There is no other way for them to be saved outside of the news of the resurrection of Christ. As a result, all of the great missionary movements in history have been led by predestinarians who believe that men are lost and on their way to hell unless they embrace the Gospel.
Just something to think about.
BTW, have you notice how a Calvinist reads this verse:
John 1:12-13 But as many as received Him, to them gave He power to become the sons of God, even to those who believe in His name, who were born not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.Just like this verse:
Genesis 2:7 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.In other words, those who received [our action I think] Him were born of God [His prior action in the past]. Cause: born of God. Effect: We received Him.
You had best explain that to the Egyptians He drowned in the Red Sea and the infants of Egypt that He slay. The people of Israel were His chosen people..they did NOTHING to earn that position..He elected them to it..The are the "apple of His Eye"
The Bible gives a possible answer about what reason would make legitimate God's sending some to heaven and some to hell. If they choose to believe in His Son, "as many as received Him to them He gave power to become sons of God."
You still have not answered me X ,What makes some come and not others?
Did you come because you were smarter? what was it that made you come?
Now, let's say you don't like my answer about "receiving Him." That's OK. But it doesn't solve YOUR dilemma.
The Bible is clear that God doesn't show partiality or favoritism. Can't argue with it. You must reconcile that with so-called "sovereign selection." That is not an easy task. How do you do it in a way that takes "God does not show favoritism" at face value?
Actually I have just showed you that God does indeed have a special people..that did nothing that recommended them to God, He chose them out of all the other nations to "be a peculiar people" to Himself..
Paul understood that God acted on him before he responded..
Ephesians 1 4 According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:
5 Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,
6 To the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved.
Ephesians 6:9 Ephesians 6 Ephesians 6:8-10 And masters, treat your slaves in the same way. Do not threaten them, since you know that he who is both their Master and yours is in heaven, and there is no favoritism with him.
You probably didn't find it in your word search because I spelled it wrong (sorry.) Left out an "i." It is favorItism.
That's the NIV. NASB renders it "partiality."
The Romans context above is clearly about the basis on which reward/punishment will be meted out. This is a universal passage.
However, ignore all that.
What I want is for Woody (you, too, if you wish) to get out a dictionary and give me an explanation of what that English sentence means.
"For God does not show favoritism."
What is a literal interpretation of those words irrespective of one's theology or philosophy? .
I think maybe the Great Commission may be the reason--what do you think? Are you seriously suggesting my position second-guesses God?
...predestinarians who believe that men are...on their way to hell unless they embrace the Gospel.
This sounds like a contradiction. Men can embrace the Gospel? I thought you've been telling us that God pushes us towards it?
If God only saves some of us for His glory, then please explain Romans 2--verse 11 in particular. God plays no favourites.
Men do respond to God, but do they "seek after" God? There is a difference. Balaam responded to God in all the wrong ways. The Hebrews responded to God in all the wrong ways:
Psalm 78:21-24, 29-31 Therefore the LORD heard this and was wroth; so a fire was kindled against Jacob, and anger also rose up against Israel, because they believed not in God and trusted not in His salvation, though He had commanded the clouds from above, and opened the doors of heaven, and had rained down manna upon them to eat, and had given them of the corn of heaven.I think that you are stopping too short in Romans 2 for Paul begins Romans 3 by saying "What advantage then has the Jew,..." and continues in verse 9 with "What then?" I think that Romans 2 is leading up his points and conclusions in Romans 3. Romans 3:10 is a verse which is a monumental obstacle to overcome to claim that men seek salvation apart from the prior regenerative act of God.So they ate and were well filled, for He gave them their own desire. But they were not estranged from their lust; but while their meat was yet in their mouths, the wrath of God came upon them and slew the fattest of them, and smote down the chosen men of Israel.
You're not serious, are you? Wasn't it Abraham was was re-named Israel? Are these not his descendents? God made a promise to Israel to bless his descendents. God keeps His promises.
Actually I have just showed you that God does indeed have a special people..that did nothing that recommended them to God, He chose them out of all the other nations to "be a peculiar people" to Himself..
So, then, since you believe that God does show favoritism, are you saying that that line in Romans is a false line and shouldn't be in the Bible? Are you among those who believe that our Bible is corrupted and is not entirely the word of God.
You say, "God shows favoritism."
The Bible says, "God does not show favoritism."
One what basis are you right and the Bible wrong?
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.