We obviously have an honest disagreement. :)
But it does not follow that God PURPOSELY created [the example character] Sam to reject God. God certainly knew that Sam would become evil, and allowed it to bring about a greater good elsewhere. But GOD CREATING EVIL? That is an incredible leap of logic.
I agree that this is an incredible leap of logic. So why do you make it? I don't. :) God either knew Sam's outcome or He didn't. If you say that God DID know, then our answers should be the same. You said that God, knowing Sam's ultimate downfall, still used him for His purposes in other areas. I fully agree. So why do you take this and then jump to God creating evil? I don't see any connection. God created Sam knowing that Sam would be lost. We both agree to that statement. Yet somehow, it's different if I say it. I don't understand. :)
Clearly, it says that God desires all men to be saved. Yet, all men are not saved. It has been the universal teaching of Scripture AND Tradition that this means that it is MAN who chooses evil.
I'll agree that it is man who chooses evil, but I don't see how this follows from the verses you are talking about. If you would agree to "outward call" vs. decree, then we could be in better agreement here. But in any case, if God's true desire is for all men to be saved, then under your theology God does almost nothing to achieve what He desires, given the power He has. This describes a very weak God to me. There are tons of examples in the Bible where God is clear, direct, and forceful in achieving what He wants. Why would He choose to be especially weak with His most beloved?
Several things about this passage [Rom 9:14-18]. First, it speaks about nations: Israel and the Gentiles. Not about individuals. Thus, God grants mercy and predestines those nations whom He wills.
What are you talking about? It mentions Pharaoh by name and says "hardening". This is one specific guy we are talking about here. The OT quote leads only to one place. How do you translate this into "nations"? The opposite is absolutely clear.
An example of this is the Pharaoh mentioned. "Being raised up", as Paul says regarding the Pharaoh, is NOT about being created. Being raised up is being given an occupation, a place in salvation history, the external order. This doesn't say anything about individual salvation OR individual creation to reprobation.
Joe, you're making this all up out of thin air. :) Does verse 18 have ANYTHING to do with verse 17, or are they random verses that are completely independent from each other? :) I mean, that's what you are arguing here.
If God desires all men to be saved and God died for ALL men, (which means He has great love for men!), then how can you say God does not give sufficient grace to all men, or that God creates men who CANNOT be saved?
The more I read your comments the more I think you equate God's desire with His decree. This is worse for your position because it makes God all the more a failure. In your statement here, you have God "hoping" or "wishing" that He gets what He wants. Is that really what an omnipotent God does? Not in my book.
FK: "Those who are predestined get saving grace. Those who are not predestined do not."
Predestined for membership to the Church. Nowhere does Paul talk about individual predestination to glory in heaven. The Church teaches that even those with full membership are not necessarily destined for heaven. Thus, predestination has nothing to do with "saving grace" for glory in heaven.
What? First, your side tells me that predestination means God is a stenographer who copies down the names of those who accept them and then claims the list as His own for who gets into Heaven. Now, we have the new idea that predestination has nothing to do with actually getting into Heaven. Instead, predestination is reduced to Church membership, which under Apostolic theology can be had for the asking, whether one is a believer or not. As I have always said, predestination is absolutely meaningless under your theology. What does Paul REALLY say:
Rom 8:29-30 : 29 For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the likeness of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers. 30 And those he predestined , he also called; those he called, he also justified; those he justified, he also glorified.
Eph 1:4-6 : 4 For he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in his sight. In love 5 he predestined us to be adopted as his sons through Jesus Christ, in accordance with his pleasure and will— 6 to the praise of his glorious grace, which he has freely given us in the One he loves.
Eph 1:11-14 : 11 In him we were also chosen, having been predestined according to the plan of him who works out everything in conformity with the purpose of his will, 12 in order that we, who were the first to hope in Christ, might be for the praise of his glory. 13 And you also were included in Christ when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation. Having believed, you were marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit, 14 who is a deposit guaranteeing our inheritance until the redemption of those who are God's possession — to the praise of his glory.
In all of this you see nothing about the predestined being justified, you see nothing about the predestined becoming His children (which He promises to not lose one), and you see nothing about the predestined having the Holy Seal of God upon them "guaranteeing our inheritance until the redemption of those who are God's possession". Instead, all you see is Church membership which can be lost. Above you said: "We have been given Divine Revelation. We must work with what we are given, not toss aside things because they don't fit our paradigm." Unbelievable. :)
You replied: We obviously have an honest disagreement. :)
Before we continue, we should clear that up. BOTH of us cannot be correct on this issue - and since you claim to not be a relativist, we should establish the correct position.
Please show me how you come up with your reasonings. Is it philosophical or metaphysical? Or is it scripturally based? I imagine it is the former, since Scripture clearly shows that Christ's atonement was not limited. I have posted a number of such verses. The Church also taught the same thing. Coupled with the idea that man can refuse God's advances of grace, it seems logical that your point is philosophically based.
Since this is key to our discussions, I would like to stop and focus here before we continue. Show me why you believe Christ's atonement was NEVER INTENDED for anyone but the "elect".
Regards
“God gives man potential to all men to be saved. God DIED for EVERYONE. Is that clear?”
Someone needs to tell that to Jesus:
John 17:10, “For I have given unto them the words which thou gavest me; and they have received them, and have known surely that I came out from thee, and they have believed that thou didst send me.I pray for them: I pray not for the world, but for them which thou hast given me; for they are thine.”
If He is not praying for the world then how can there be His intercession for the world?