Posted on 01/20/2002 5:02:48 PM PST by CCWoody
We don't always give verse numbers. But you are a slanderer, friend.
For one thing, we cover a lot of ground fast. For another thing, we can't always remember verse numbers. For another thing, the verses we give without bothering to give chapter-verse citations are verses which you should already know. i.e., shouldn't even need to look up. For another thing, we assume you have a concordance.
So, your insinuation that we are trying to keep you from looking up the verses is false. One has to wonder (a bit) what that makes you.
My point is that gratuitous insults such as yours are typical of reprobates at worst and carnal spiritual brats at best. Which are you?
You are getting ground to powder in this debate. We don't delight to do this to you, but you leave us no choice. There are other souls at stake, even I do not assume that this exercise will do you any good. I want them to notice what kind of spirit you have in slandering us.
It is very instructive, I suspect.
Besides, my conscience is clear. You have already had plenty of calm opportunities to repent, so if you get more and more angry from this point, don't blame us for your obstinacy of Adamic pride masquerading as Christian grace and love for God's Truth. As OP has repeatedly pointed out, you just hate the truth of God's absolute predestination.
(I think our God, the real God, frightens you in a kind of carnal fear-and-loathing. Well, that is the expected reaction to the God of Romans 9, not to mention Matthew 11.)
Only if he is born again (from above).
A dead man cannot seek God, nor can he bring himself back to life.
Salvation is a work of God, not a choice of man.
It also says that the elect is that great congregation of ALL those who end up believing in Him.
14. It now remains to see why the Lord acts in the manner in which it is plain that he does. If the answer be given, that it is because men deserve this by their impiety, wickedness, and ingratitude, it is indeed well and truly said; but still, because it does not yet appear what the cause of the difference is, why some are turned to obedience, and others remain obdurate we must, in discussing it, pass to the passage from Moses, on which Paul has commented, namely, "Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might show my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth," (Rom. 9:17). The refusal of the reprobate to obey the word of God when manifested to them, will be properly ascribed to the malice and depravity of their hearts, provided it be at the same time added that they were adjudged to this depravity, because they were raised up by the just but inscrutable judgment of God, to show forth his glory by their condemnation. In like manner, when it is said of the sons of Eli, that they would not listen to salutary admonitions "because the Lord would slay them," (1 Sam. 2:25), it is not denied that their stubbornness was the result of their own iniquity; but it is at the same time stated why they were left to their stubbornness, when the Lord might have softened their hearts: namely, because his immutable decree had once for all doomed them to destruction. Hence the words of John, "Though he had done so many miracles before them, yet they believed not on him; that the saying of Esaias the prophet might be fulfilled which he spake, Lord, who has believed our report?" (John 12:37, 38); for though he does not exculpate their perverseness, he is satisfied with the reason that the grace of God is insipid to men, until the Holy Spirit gives it its savor. And Christ, in quoting the prophecy of Isaiah, "They shall be all taught of God," (John 6:45), designs only to show that the Jews were reprobates and aliens from the Church, because they would not be taught: and gives no other reason than that the promise of God does not belong to them. Confirmatory of this are the words of Paul, "Christ crucified" was "unto the Jews a stumbling block, and unto the Greeks foolishness; but unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God," (1 Cor. 1:23). For after mentioning the usual result wherever the gospel is preached, that it exasperates some, and is despised by others, he says, that it is precious to them only who are called. A little before he had given them the name of believers, but he was unwilling to refuse the proper rank to divine grace, which precedes faith; or rather, he added the second term by way of correction, that those who had embraced the gospel might ascribe the merit of their faith to the calling of God. Thus, also, he shortly after shows that they were elected by God. When the wicked hear these things, they complain that God abuses his inordinate power; to make cruel sport with the miseries of his creatures. But let us, who know that all men are liable on so many grounds to the judgment of God, that they cannot answer for one in a thousand of their transgressions (Job 9:3), confess that the reprobate suffer nothing which is not accordant with the most perfect justice. When unable clearly to ascertain the reason, let us not decline to be somewhat in ignorance in regard to the depths of the divine wisdom.I still can't seem to find any idea of how the Reprobate "accept" the Gospel in a meaningful way. Throughout the chapter, it seems that the only value in preaching to the Reprobate that Calvin distinguishes is in how God glorifies Himself and in how the Reprobate are predestined without having any cause since both Elect and Reprobate cannot excuse even one transgression in a thousand. There is also some mention that such preaching increases the damnation of the Reprobate nad hardens their hearts still further though God's purpose in this seems unscrutable since it seems that such hardening would inevitably lead to greater acts of evil than if their reprobation had not been increased by God's will.
Romans 12I had always understood these verses to apply to the conduct of Christians toward both brethren and toward non-Christians, spelling out the requirement to forsake vengeance for the Lord's sake. As you're aware, the Institutes do expound this teaching at length and buttress the argument with others to make the injunction even more absolute. Precisely how do we apply this to the necessity of Preaching to the Reprobate?
- 16
- Be of the same mind one toward another. Mind not high things, but condescend to men of low estate. Be not wise in your own conceits.
- 17
- Recompense to no man evil for evil. Provide things honest in the sight of all men.
- 18
- If it be possible, as much as lieth in you, live peaceably with all men.
- 19
- Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord.
- 20
- Therefore if thine enemy hunger, feed him; if he thirst, give him drink: for in so doing thou shalt heap coals of fire on his head.
- 21
- Be not overcome of evil, but overcome evil with good.
Yes, but God only provides the way for those He hath chosen in Him before the foundation of the world.
The scripture makes it plain that God's love extends to all mankind and in order for Man to love God back...then he must choose to, otherwise it is not love...it is tyranny.
This stuff is elementary spiritual knowledge.
Oh well...
Nope. I say it is not possible that Jesus would ever exercise his free will to disobey the Father.
You are confusing capacity with propensity.
Like any first-century Jewish man, Jesus had arms which He could raise in defiance against God the Father if He so chose; He had a tongue, and knew the Hebrew words of blasphemy with which He could profane the Father if He so chose. This speaks of the volitional capacity of His free will, and Jesus possessed Free Will.
But because He had not the slightest inkling of a Want to defy the Father anywhere in His emotional constitution, it is statistically impossible that He would ever choose to disobey the Father -- because He would never, ever Want to defy the Father, He would never, ever Will to defy the Father.
He had all the volitional capacity of any Man's free will, and he had precisely a zero percent propensity to ever use that Will in defiance of the Father.
Such an action, though volitionally possible, is a statistical impossibility. Zero Percent probability.
That which prevented Him was not an eternal decree. It was His free choice to see the scriptures fulfilled. So, then, do you think that since Jesus does know what free choice is that he is POWERFUL enough to provide free choice to ALL of His creatures.
Gosh, I think that all Men have free choice NOW.
The trouble is, since Totally-Depraved Fallen man possesses zero God-pleasing Wants in his fallen emotional constitution, there is a zero-percent statistical possibility that he will ever, absent the prior re-engineering of his Wants by the sovereign Regeneration of the Spirit, ever exercise his Free Will to wosrhip the Son.
He has a tongue and the free-will volitional capacity for worship, but his Fallen spirit does not wish to -- ever. So, absent prior regeneration, he never, ever will worship the Son. Such an action, though volitionally possible, is a statistical impossibility. Zero Percent probability.
And had God seen fit to Predestine these people to Repent and be Saved, He could have used the Grace of Miracles to bring about their Repentance. In fact, Jesus says it is certain that they would have Repented, had God seen fit to display such miracles.
But God did not Purpose to predestine them to Repentance and Salvation, but rather to predestine them to Non-Repentance and Damnation. And so, he selected the Option (NON-performance of miracles) which would pre-determine the decision of Tyre and Sidon to NOT Repent, and be Damned.
As I said -- give Tyre and Sidon all the free will and natural moral competence you like, and you still cannot escape from the fact that God, by His election, absolutely predestined their NON-Repentance unto Damnation. This is what you are desperately trying to avoid... and you can't.
Kinda like the Name-it and Claim-it doctrine you adhere to?
Repent of your witchcraft.
Christian duty. Always present truth.
I still cannot find your earlier quote. The use of the word "thy" makes it obvoius that it is from the King James. Can you cite the source of your quote "his blood be on thy hands"?
No, not your fault; I apologize for the bad citation. I was quoting Ezekiel 3 from memory, but the actual wording is, "When I say unto the wicked, Thou shalt surely die; and thou givest him not warning, nor speakest to warn the wicked from his wicked way, to save his life; the same wicked man shall die in his iniquity; but his blood will I require at thine hand." Mea maxima culpa for the mis-quote.
Thanks. Respectfully, while I botched the citation on Ezekiel 3 (the correct KJV quote carries a very similar moral equation, but is a little more nuanced than the apparent direct-equivalence suggested [inadvertantly!] by my mis-quote) and so should've just looked up the verse in the first place to avoid confusion, I would reserve that I have cut&pasted the entire and unedited Matthew 11:20-27 passage so many times it's nearly wall-papered the thread!!
Hahaha....you post that like it was something I would shrink from.
LOL...
Let go of your fear and bitterness Bro. It is what is hindering God from moving in your life.
BTW: Do you believe in speaking in Tongues?
To the extent that preaching the Gospel is a form of Love, and that the sinner, by his rejection of the Gospel, is heaping coals of greater condemnation upon himself, I believe it falls under the same ethical aegis.
Does this not present further difficulties with reading the following verse (21): "Be not overcome of evil, but overcome evil with good."?
I don't think so, but I'll happily listen. How so?
I think it might be Eze.33:8,
When I say unto the wicked, O wicked man, thou shalt surely die; and if thou dost not speak to warn the wicked from his way, that wicked man shall die in his inquity, but his blood will I require at thine hand'
That's fine. I'm engaging in an "analogous allegory" which I believe to be a morally valid under the over-arching Ethic of the passage, but you know that I deeply respect Calvin ("the first fundamentalist") in his distrust of the "allegorical" reading of Scripture, so I'm content to acknowledge the "charitable" traditional reading as the only immediate and direct teaching conferred by the Text if you prefer not to pursue the suggested "evangelistic" allegory.
I can appreciate your desire to defend those writing, but it is a common courtousy to cite passages so we do not have to hunt them down. I am sure in other threads it is done, but the group that I have dealt with so far. has not.
Whatever one cites as a reference the information should be given where to find it. I can see sometimes forgetting it when one gets in a hurry, but on the threads I have been on, this a consistent practice.
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.