Spurgeon:
For Whom did Christ Die? - Romans 5:6
This key theological difference is why Islam consistently produces terrorists and evangelical Christianity rarely ever does.
(Will check back Monday.)
1. In the 60's, there was a well known "regeneration gap".
2. Bill Clinton is a sleazy child of the 60's, and a well known regenerate.
3. I have a portable gasoline regenerator in my garage.
Conclusion: Gasoline is evil!
Sorry, Mom, but it doesn't set up a comparison if someone steadfastly continues to say "no."
And, yes, I do think there could be growth to a better understanding. For example in Act 28 some were convinced by Paul's persuasive argument.
But we want to hear what your views are, for we know that people everywhere are talking against this sect." 23 They arranged to meet Paul on a certain day, and came in even larger numbers to the place where he was staying. From morning till evening he explained and declared to them the kingdom of God and tried to convince them about Jesus from the Law of Moses and from the Prophets. 24 Some were convinced by what he said, but others would not believe.
No. You used the expression...."someone's REFUSAL"....
They made their choice, didn't they?
1 I say the truth in Christ, I lie not, my conscience also bearing me witness in the Holy Ghost,
2 That I have great heaviness and continual sorrow in my heart.
3 For I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh:
Paul wishes (after the example of Moses) that he could sacrifice his own salvation if it would save his kindred Israelites. See commentary on verse 22.
4 Who are Israelites; to whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises;
5 Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen.
6 Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel:
This is clarified in verse 8. Righteous Israel is not the same as the literal descendants of Israel.
7 Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called.
The chosen people Israel are not all of the children of Abraham, but those who are also children of Isaac (and Jacob, whom the Lord named Israel.)
It is too bad that the original epistle is no longer extant, because there is an evident copying/transposition error here. Certainly it should read, "Neither, because they are the children of Abraham, are they all [the chosen] seed: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called."
8 That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.
The chosen people of God are defined as the righteous, who inherit the promises made to Israel, who are adopted in if not born into the House of Israel. The chosen people are not the literal descendants of Israel irrespective of their righteousness.
16 So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy.
Salvation comes, not because we will it to happen, nor because we compete for it in a footrace and win a prize, but because God provides the atoning blood of Christ when we repent and obey the laws and ordinances of the Gospel.
18 Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth.
The Greek here means "... whom he will he leaves to [his own] stubbornness [or hardness]."
The Lord looks into the heart and has mercy on those whose repentance is genuine and whose hearts are contrite. Those who will not repent He must leave to their stubbornness.
Here I reproduce excerpts from eastsider's posts #51 and #75 on Predestination Thread III.
from eastsider #51:
There is still an important linguistic fact that has not yet been mentioned, which IMO is the key to solving the riddle, and that is the meaning of the expression God hardens the heart.
The expression God hardens the heart in the Greek New Testament is borrowed from the Hebrew Old Testament. Hebrew has a verbal modality of causation called the hiphil that the expression God hardens the heart does not employ. One way to approximate the non-causative meaning of the expression God hardened the heart of Pharaoh, for example, is by analogy to the English expression so-and-so made me angry. We know that so-and-so was not literally the source of my anger; I was. Similarly, God was not literally the source of Pharaoh’s hard heart; Pharaoh was.
Similarly God is not literally the source of the Reprobates’ hard hearts; they are.
eastsider #75:
I am merely exploring the theological concept that some men are damned from eternity, trying to understand Uriel's reasoning from Scripture. ... To me, the cardinal premise of the scriptural proofs is the distinction between the Elect and the Reprobate. This premise strikes me as somewhat odd, considering that I cannot find the term "the Reprobate" in my Bible.
As I see it, "the Reprobate" do not exist. They’re nothing but the chimerical spawn of a faulty premise; viz., that the expression God hardens the heart stands for the proposition that God withholds from some men’s wills the grace to answer his call to repentance. This premise is simply not supported linguistically. Ask any Rabbi with a Hebrew text to look at Ex 4:21 and tell you if the verb "will harden" contains the hiphil. It doesn’t. Have him check every last reference in the Old Testament to the expression God hardens the heart to see if just one of them contains the hiphil. None does.
The expression God hardens the heart does stand for the proposition that each man is personally responsible for his own response to God’s call to repentance, which, in order to be true, necessarily presumes that each man is in fact able to respond to God’s call.
19 Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will?
Paul is talking to people who have fallen into sin and do not acknowledge it, perhaps some of the grievous sins in Romans 1, who say, "Why does God continue to find fault with us? Who among us was disobedient, resisting His will?"
20 Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus?
Paul challenges their protest, reasserting the Creator/created relationship, and says they do not have the understanding necessary to criticize their Creator. They are disobedient and in need of repentance.
(Now if, as the Calvinists say, God created them as totally-depraved vessels of wrath, they would have had enough understanding, and just cause, to protest the way they were created, and to insist that they be recreated as vessels of mercy! They had not done anything, before they were created, to deserve being created as vessels of wrath! Fortunately, God does not have the imperfections the Calvinists ascribe to Him.)
Of course, it would be perfectly acceptable for the righteous to ask, "Why hast thou made me thus?" The Psalmist answers (forgive me for quoting so much, I love this psalm):
7 Whither shall I go from thy spirit? or whither shall I flee from thy presence?21 Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?
8 If I ascend up into heaven, thou art there: if I make my bed in hell, behold, thou art there.
9 If I take the wings of the morning, and dwell in the uttermost parts of the sea;
10 Even there shall thy hand lead me, and thy right hand shall hold me.
11 If I say, Surely the darkness shall cover me; even the night shall be light about me.
12 Yea, the darkness hideth not from thee; but the night shineth as the day: the darkness and the light are both alike to thee.
13 For thou hast possessed my reins: thou hast covered me in my mother's womb.
14 I will praise thee; for I am fearfully and wonderfully made: marvellous are thy works; and that my soul knoweth right well. (Psalms 139:7-14, emphasis mine)
Paul makes reference to the classic "clay in the hands of the potter" allegory found in Jeremiah 18, familiar to his listeners. If he had intended another allegory, he would have had to give it in full. The brief reference shows that Jeremiah 18 was intended.
Today if a speaker makes reference to the Parable of the Prodigal Son, and you do not know what that is, you can ask almost any church member and they can find it for you, in Luke 15. Similarly for the Parable of the Wheat and the Tares (Matthew 13), or the Rich Man and Lazarus (Luke 16).
In Paul's day: Ten Commandments? Exodus 20. The Lord is my Shepherd? Psalm 23. Clay in the hands of the potter? Jeremiah 18.
2 Arise, and go down to the potter's house, and there I will cause thee to hear my words.The main point here that refutes the Calvinist interpretation of Romans 9:21 is that the allegory tells of soft clay, on the wheel, in the potter's hands, and so does Paul. This is not about hardened vessels whose fate is sealed.
3 Then I went down to the potter's house, and, behold, he wrought a work on the wheels.
4 And the vessel that he made of clay was marred in the hand of the potter: so he made it again another vessel, as seemed good to the potter to make it.
5 Then the word of the LORD came to me, saying,
6 O house of Israel, cannot I do with you as this potter? saith the LORD. Behold, as the clay is in the potter's hand, so are ye in mine hand, O house of Israel.
7 At what instant I shall speak concerning a nation, and concerning a kingdom, to pluck up, and to pull down, and to destroy it;
8 If that nation, against whom I have pronounced, turn from their evil, I will repent of the evil that I thought to do unto them.
9 And at what instant I shall speak concerning a nation, and concerning a kingdom, to build and to plant it;
10 If it do evil in my sight, that it obey not my voice, then I will repent of the good, wherewith I said I would benefit them. (Jeremiah 18:2-10)
The vessel becomes marred (Paul's phrase is "unto dishonor") in the potter's hands because of the wickedness of the nation it represents. If the nation does not repent, the potter destroys the marred vessel (nation) by forming the clay back into a lump, then makes of the same lump (Paul's phrase) another vessel (nation).
If the nation repents, then in this allegory the vessel will no longer be marred as the potter shapes it on the wheel. If a righteous nation turns to evil, they lose the promised blessing.
Paul here is likening this allegory to individuals, exhorting them to repentance so they will not be marred vessels on the potter's wheel, so they will not be destroyed by the potter because of their iniquity. He knows that all have the capacity and the ability to repent.
22 What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction:
Why would Paul, in Romans 9:18-22, be talking about God creating people solely for the purpose of thrusting them down to hell, solely for His good pleasure, blaming everything on them, as the Calvinists say? The answer is, he isn't.
Paul just finished a few verses earlier, in Romans 9:2-4, laying his own salvation on the altar if only it would help his fellow Israelites, many of whom may have assented to the most depraved act in history, the crucifixion of the God of heaven and earth!
Paul makes reference in verse 3 to the conversation Moses had with the LORD after he came down from the Mount with the two tables of testimony and found the Israelites worshipping a golden calf.
Notice that Moses offers to sacrifice his own salvation for them, a supreme act of love, but the LORD leaves the responsibility where it belongs:
31 And Moses returned unto the LORD, and said, Oh, this people have sinned a great sin, and have made them gods of gold.It is contrary to the justice of God for Him to create vessels of wrath. They must become vessels of wrath as a result of their own choosing, or God could not, in justice, thrust them down to hell. Notice that Paul does not say who filled the vessels with wrath, or who fitted them to destruction.
32 Yet now, if thou wilt forgive their sin; and if not, blot me, I pray thee, out of thy book which thou hast written.
33 And the LORD said unto Moses, Whosoever hath sinned against me, him will I blot out of my book. (Exodus 32:31-33)
How does God show His wrath, or His power, by "enduring with much longsuffering?" The verse would make more sense if it were written thus:
What if God, willing to shew his loving-kindness, and to make his patience known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction:Was there a copying error, as the Scriptures were copied and recopied over the centuries? Too bad that the original epistle, from the hand of Paul himself, or his scribe, is no longer extant.
23 And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory,
We are foreordained unto glory, because of His loving-kindness, and the promises of glory are contingent, as always, upon the righteousness of the recipient.
In summary, Romans 9 does not provide any support for the Calvinist position at all, whether taken as a whole or verse by verse.