“When it comes down to it, if one accepts your convoluted view, ultimately the difference between the believer and the unbeliever is in the righteousness of the former in having a ‘willing’ heart of his own to ask for a new heart from the Savior.”
A new and willing heart is offered freely to all. The ultimate difference between the lost and saved is the end result, either heaven or hell, either Christ-likeness or remaining in our sins. You are talking about a causal difference. The flaw of your thinking is in comparing people between eachother which is not the measure.
“But they, measuring themselves by themselves, and comparing themselves among themselves, are not wise... But ‘he who glories, let him glory in the Lord.’” (2 Corinthians 10:12b,17)
Every person is different. Every person is unique in God’s plan. Jacob and Esau, as we saw earlier, illustrate how that we must accept our lot in life because God will use us to accomplish whatever purpose He has designed us to fulfill. If we resist, He accomplishes His will through our destruction. If we humble ourselves and submit, He blesses us in it and lifts us up. He may, if He so chooses, offer more than one opportunity to surrender to His will. We saw how that Jonah first resisted God’s call but later turned to God in His desperation. When he ran away God brought the fear of his name to those at sea. When he cooperated, God brought salvation to Nineveh. Likewise with the two Pharaohs as we discussed.
“Peter, seeing him [John], said to Jesus, ‘But Lord, what about this man?’ Jesus said to him, ‘If I will that he remain till I come, what is that to you? You follow Me.’ (John 21:21-22)
“At the final evaluation, however, we can only say that they have earned grace by their continued faithfulness.”
That’s not it at all. Can’t you see that accepting a gift of your own free will is not earning it? As above, everyone should glory in the Lord for receiving what he or she receives. We cannot boast because we receive it and others did not. Again, that is focussing on our neighbor rather than the Lord.
The church is the bride of Christ. The marriage is the third divinely arranged marriage. Adam and Eve are the first. Isaac and Rebeka are the second. Each picture God’s ways.
“Then they called Rebekah and said to her, ‘Will you go with this man?’ And she said, ‘I will go.’”(Genesis 24:58)
Do you believe coerced marriages are a good pattern to follow? Does Rebekah’s willingness earn her the right to marry, or is it simply a necessary element?
“The difference between us, of course, is that the ‘choice’ (the decision to follow Christ) is determined by Christ, whereas you say the person’s choice is determined by themselves, and acted upon retroactively in predestination.”
And you say my view is “convoluted”? Your explanation defies the very meaning of “choice”. I do not choose what my options are. The sun rises and sets without my choice. On the other hand, I sometimes may decide whether to stand in it or in the shade.
The object lesson in the garden of Eden shows three basic elements of choice: the decision whether or not to obey a positive command, the decision of whether or not to obey a negative command, and areas of personal liberty over which we are freely governed entirely by our own preferences. Adam and Even were created free. By sin they were sold into slavery, and we were born into this slavery. Christ has given a proclamation of liberty so that people are restored to a similar state as Adam and Eve.
Do you think that people go to hell by virtue of the fact their parents are sinners? Aren’t we sinners because we are born sinners? We sin because we are sinners. The only people who were sinners because they sinned are Adam and Eve. Yet God says He doesn’t punish anyone for their parent’s sins.
“But every one shall die for his own iniquity” (Jeremiah 31:30)
People go to hell for only one reason — rejecting God’s free gift of salvation in His Son Jesus Christ. It is a gift. It is free. We do not earn it or work for it. This means people can freely receive. They are no longer in bondage and unable to receive it.
“Therefore, to say that we remain in grace through participating in works is like saying a lamp has the option of not giving light when ignited.”
I am saying that believers have a choice whether to yield to the sin that remains present around us and in us, or to walk by faith in grace. It is the same with an unbeliever presented with the Gospel and who has not yet become hardened to its message. Not only can he or she make a choice, they MUST make one. They do not have a choice as to whether they make a choice. They must yield or be hardened. Sometimes God gives another opportunity. “He gives more grace.” Yet, there comes a time when God decides He will no longer strive with men and allows them to receive the consequence of their hardened hearts.
There are some like Judas of whom Christ says “good were it for that man if he had never been born.” Yet, we have no choice as to whether we are born. God chooses who will be born, where, what time in history, etc.
“And He has made from one blood every nation of men to dwell on all the face of the earth, and has determined their preappointed times and the boundaries of their dwellings, so that they should seek the Lord, in the hope that they might grope for Him and find Him, though He is not far from each one of us” (Acts 17:26-27)
Here we see that people should or otherwise can seek God. We see they “might” meaning it is possible, but not that men “must” do so.
“Christ is quite clear that ‘You have NOT chosen me, I have chosen you.’ And so we must hold that the subsequent choosing of the believer for Christ is a direct result of Christ’s initial choice for them, and is ordained with all the other works that result from Christ’s initial choice.”
It appears you contradicted yourself. You are now saying that there is a subsequent choice by the believer to follow Christ. But your interpretation is literal that they made no choice at all. But again, Christ is using a figure of speech for emphasis. We are not saved because we a smart enough, wise enough, clever enough, righteous enough, or some other enough to CHOOSE. We are saved because He chose to save us. He did not have to. He chose to.
“You simply avoided quoting the scripture which says ‘none seek,’ and then asserting that the existence of those who do seek must mean that Paul was just kidding when he said ‘none seek’ at all, in all of humanity. My view reconciles the two, by asserting that only those seek who have been regenerated, and these same regenerated souls infallibly know that Jesus is the Savior due to God’s direct revelation and imprinting on that same soul His identity. Your view says silly stuff like ‘none seek until they do,’ ignoring the necessity of God regenerating the soul of the believer so that they do believe.”
Not at all. My point is that everyone is in the category of the “none who seek” at some point in time. Yet there are those who do seek at some later point in time. I gave scriptures to support that people do seek, they do choose. Paul is not sayng that none ever seek. He is saying that some find without seeking because God seeks us out when we are not even seeking Him. Who does Christ seek?
“for the Son of Man has come to seek and to save that which was lost.” (Luke 19:10)
“Until the natural man is indeed made into the spiritual man, he cannot believe the Gospel nor even understand what it actually teaches.”
Paul was talking about deeper spiritual truths such as spiritual gifts. He even says that not only can the natural man not receive these doctrines, but neither can immature and carnal believers. Contrarily, there is a natural revelation of spiritual truth because all humans have a living, functioning spirit. In this same passage Paul teaches that humans understand human things because of the human spirit in them. It is possible for even lost people to understand some of the spiritual truths about Christ because Christ is also fully man.
“for when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do the things in the law, these, although not having the law, are a law to themselves, who show the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and between themselves their thoughts accusing or else excusing them” (Romans 2:14-15)
“For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse” (Romans 1:20)
“Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law, that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God. Therefore by the deeds of the law no flesh will be justified in His sight, for by the law is the knowledge of sin.” (Romans 3:19-20)
How many mouths? Every. How much of the world? All.
Who does the Holy Spirit convict of sin? Just the elect? No. The world is convicted. This is a spiritual revelation to the natural realm.
“And when He [the Comforter Who is the Holy Spirit] has come, He will convict the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment” (John 16:8)
“They do not believe because it was not given to them to believe.”
They could not believe at that time and onward. This is the result of their hardening their hearts to the truth.
“He who is often rebuked, and hardens his neck, Will suddenly be destroyed, and that without remedy.” (Proverbs 29:1)
If you go back and read what I said carefully, I said there was not a category of people who NEVER had the opportunity to believe. The people in the passage who could not believe had rejected Christ in finality. They could not believe because God was done striving with them.
“And the Lord said, ‘My Spirit shall not strive with man forever, for he is indeed flesh; yet his days shall be one hundred and twenty years.’” (Genesis 6:3)
“A command by God to do this or that does not imply a moral ability, in and of himself, for man to do it”
I agree. What God is seeking though is an admission of our failure and inability to do so.
“But if God does not give us that heart to begin with, it is impossible to desire to have one in the first place. “
It is impossible to desire a new heart because we do not already have it? Contrarily, it is impossible to receive a gift unless the desire to receive it already exists. Do not conflate choice with merit. God gives the ability to choose. We are responsible for the choice. This does not give us any credit for salvation, but it does mean we are required to make a choice. However, our choice is like the clay in the potter’s hands. Our choice is not what we are to become or what shape we are to form. Our choice is whether we cooperate or resist.
“Are you Roman Catholic?”
No. And I do not subscribe to salvation by our good works. I do subscribe to salvation by the work of faith. God opens and shuts the door of salvation. We either walk through the door while it is open or get shut out when it is shut. Only God can open and shut the door though. It is open to all until God closes it. He either shuts us in or shuts us out.
“When God predestinates a vessel of wrath, He merely passes them by. He does not give them a sin nature that they possess by nature.”
I do not find a predestination to wrath. This I think is the biggest flaw of Calvinism as it is commonly expressed, or at least as many people understand it. People draw the conclusion that when people go to hell it is because of God. But God has done everything possible to keep people from needing to go to hell. We do not read of hell being prepared for the Devil, his angels, AND the non-elect humans. There is an exact number of places to be occupied in heaven. Hell, on the other hand, is never full. It is unlimited in capacity.
“Hell and Destruction are never full” (Proverbs 27:20a)
“Then the master said to the servant, ‘Go out into the highways and hedges, and compel them to come in, that my house may be filled.” (Luke 14:23)
Interestingly, in this last verse, those who come are “compelled”. I think this means to beg people to come in rather than coerce. Otherwise, why not just compel the original invitees to come in? The first invitees made excuses and did not come because of their unwillingness.
A predestination to wrath would be like a potter forming clay vessels with the express plan to break them. I suppose we do make skeets for skeet shooting, but do you think God makes some people just so He can destroy them and cast them down to hell? The passage in Romans 9 reflects how God delights in showing mercy but simply tolerates the existence of the vessels that must later be destroyed. He doesn’t create them to be destroyed. He creates vessels. Some do not become what they are meant to become. This is not a fault of the potter. It is a result of uncooperative clay. However, the vessels formed well cannot boast of forming themselves because that is the potter’s work.
“What if God, wanting to show His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, and that He might make known the riches of His glory on the vessels of mercy, which He had prepared beforehand for glory, even us whom He called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?” (Romans 9:22-24)
“Prepared” (for destruction) is the accusative neuter plural perfect passive participle form of the verb katartizo, or so I am reading. It means they are destined for destruction but not predestined. We see “prepared beforehand” describes the vessels of mercy using the verb proetoimazo. This is a very important distinction as the preparation of the vessels of mercy is the point or intent of the activity of preparing and fashioning the vessels, whereas the vessels of wrath are the indirect consequence of the planned preparation of the vessels of mercy. In other words, the vessels of wrath are the cost of doing business. The potter forms clay into vessels according to a plan. Some vessels do not conform and are consequently destroyed.
This is consistent with the parable of the wheat and tares which are allowed to grow together, not because the tares were planned but because their coexistence is being tolerated for the sake of the wheat.
“I simply assert that God’s decision to save a man is infallible, and that it is impossible that anyone not chosen by God can believe, and it is impossible for anyone chosen by God not to believe and desire to ‘will and to do’ by the working of God in their souls.”
Unfortunately it is an assertion that only fits some selected passages and not others as far as I can see. I am not intending to set myself up as the final arbitrator of the matter. I am just saying I am unable to see the scriptual basis for the conclusion you are reaching.
“My argument has always been that the elect are remade people, who possess a sin nature in their members and an imperfect knowledge, yet ultimately are new people within whom God works ‘both to will and to do of His good pleasure.’ This is not an argument that states that man does not need instruction from the Word of God for ‘reproof, correction, to thoroughly furnish them for good works.’ It is an argument that states that inside man is a desire to be reproofed, corrected, and thoroughly furnished.”
I can completely accept that statement.
“You’ve repeated this a number of times, but Paul never said anything of the sort. He is quoting an objection to his view, and replies that ‘who art thou to reply to God, why hast thou made me thus?’ In other words, he is rebuking the idea that God is unjust in electing one person over another. Notice you never quote the entire sentence when you reference it.”
I am assuming the familiarity of the passage as I am accustomed to quoting vast amounts of scripture which already consumes an enormous amount of space. I am by no means trying to sweep anything under the rug.
“Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will? 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?”(Romans 9:19-20)
Or... “o anthrope, menounge su tis ei o antapokrinomenos to theo”, or so I read. The subsequent statement is in contradiction to the first. Paul is not saying, “yes, but...”, he is rather saying, “no, not at all”.
Now, you did not respond to my question of how Old Testament saints were saved. I have asserted that they were saved by grace through faith just as we are. No one has ever been saved by keeping the law. So, would it be incorrect to assume that the final outcome is the same? Are the intermediary steps the same? Perhaps the saints in heaven received the full benefit of the work of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost along with the New Testament saints. I am speculating here of course. But it seems to me that the process you believe must take place would have to have been happening in secret in the past. For example, we do not read anything about God’s Spirit created in Noah a new heart and then he found grace. We do not see the Holy Spirit giving Abraham new life and then he believed. I am not even trying to be argumentative here. Honestly, I have wondered this myself and am unsure of how this transpired. But it does seem fairly difficult to reconcile the process you describe with Old Testament saints. Whereas, for me, the process might be somewhat mysterious but not inconsistent with the process I see in the New Testament. In other words, the Holy Spirit is now given where He was not before. It seems to me your view demands the Holy Spirit be given first before a person can believe. Yet we see people receive the Holy Spirit after they believe in the New Testament.
I hope I have not come across as rude, arrogant or argumentative. I appreciate the opportunity to discuss this matter and try to understand your and others’ perspectives. Please don’t take offense to my assertiveness, or especially my wordiness. Like the famous letter said, “I am sorry for writing such a long letter as I did not have time to write a short one”. Ironically, more time can sometimes produce less words to make the same point.
I did want to address one further point though. It seems that one distinction between our views may be as to who are the children of the Devil. John says the children of God and the children of the Devil are manifest based upon whether they produce the fruits of righteousness and love.
“In this the children of God and the children of the devil are manifest: Whoever does not practice righteousness is not of God, nor is he who does not love his brother.”(1 John 3:10)
My question is whether all people are either children of God or children of the Devil. That is, are people born as children of the Devil, or are people subsequent to birth born either into God’s family or the Devil’s? I believe it is subsequent and only after rejecting the revealed truth of God’s word.
“Another parable He put forth to them, saying: ‘The kingdom of heaven is like a man who sowed good seed in his field; but while men slept, his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat and went his way. But when the grain had sprouted and produced a crop, then the tares also appeared. So the servants of the owner came and said to him, ‘Sir, did you not sow good seed in your field? How then does it have tares?’ He said to them, ‘An enemy has done this.’ The servants said to him, ‘Do you want us then to go and gather them up?’ But he said, ‘No, lest while you gather up the tares you also uproot the wheat with them. Let both grow together until the harvest, and at the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, “First gather together the tares and bind them in bundles to burn them, but gather the wheat into my barn.”’’... Then Jesus sent the multitude away and went into the house. And His disciples came to Him, saying, ‘Explain to us the parable of the tares of the field.’ He answered and said to them: ‘He who sows the good seed is the Son of Man. The field is the world, the good seeds are the sons of the kingdom, but the tares are the sons of the wicked one. The enemy who sowed them is the devil, the harvest is the end of the age, and the reapers are the angels.’” (Matthew 13:24-30, 36-39)
The pattern here seems to indicate that people are not born as children of the Devil but reborn as such only after failing to accept the gospel. No amount of willing from the earth can produce growth unless and until seed lands upon it. However, Christ taught to “take heed how you hear.”
All sin by virtue of our first birth into humanity. All die for the same reason. Yet, hell is not the consequence of our birth as human beings, but it is the consequence of those who receive sufficient natural revelation to produce humility and repentance and yet harden their hearts. Those who harden their hearts will eventually be given over to Satan and receive a false gospel. The final outcome will be for those who do this to be cast into the lake of fire along with the Devil when he is judged.
“Then Jesus said to them, “A little while longer the light is with you. Walk while you have the light, lest darkness overtake you; he who walks in darkness does not know where he is going.” (John 12:35)
So I remain convinced that God has given everyone an opportunity to choose beyond what has been chosen for us by being born human. He has freed mankind from the slave market of sin so we all have the opportunity to receive everlasting life. He has given us each the opportunity, responsibility as well as the possibility to choose. If we choose life, it is because God provided life and the ability to choose it. If we choose death, we have only ourselves to blame because God afforded every opportunity. He gave everything for us to live. Those who reject the offer of His Son are treating His sacrifice with contempt and deserve the consequence of so great an offense.
The bottom line is that God and man both make choices when it comes to each instance in which a person is saved or rejects salvation. Those who end up in hell do so because of their own choice. Those who end up in heaven do so because of God’s choice. It may be paradoxical, but I am convinced this is the balance of rightly dividing the word on this issue.
Sometimes I feel that the debate over choice and destiny, over fate and possibility is a matter of perspective. Perhaps, from God’s view it appears as no choice at all because the final outcome and everything leading to it is already known by God. Yet from the human perspective, all of the events are a cumulation of many choices over time. God knows, but we do not know how all things will play out. We only have His promise to accomplish His will and purpose. We can rely on that.
“And He said, ‘The kingdom of God is as if a man should scatter seed on the ground, and should sleep by night and rise by day, and the seed should sprout and grow, he himself does not know how.’” (Mark 4:26)
Our job is to find ways to participate in the cultivating, sowing and irrigating needed to preach the gospel to all nations. It is interesting food for thought to consider the process by which germination and growth transpires. But it is not essential to understand how it works as long as we do the job we are assigned to do.
“People go to hell for only one reason — rejecting God’s free gift of salvation in His Son Jesus Christ. “
Why do you continue to tell me this as if I disagree with it? Didn’t I complain previously that you were wasting your time in telling me such things? This is two huge posts now where you waste your time telling me over and over again how people believe, or they don’t believe, or that some work, and that some don’t. It is simply your misconception that supposes that because God chooses not to elect one person over another, that the person passed by is no longer responsible for their personal rejection of Christ. This was, in fact, the same objection that Paul himself anticipated when he wrote:
Rom 9:19-21 Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted 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? (21) Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?
When I pointed out to you that this was Paul quoting an objection, and not himself speaking, you reply:
“Or... “o anthrope, menounge su tis ei o antapokrinomenos to theo”, or so I read. The subsequent statement is in contradiction to the first. Paul is not saying, “yes, but...”, he is rather saying, “no, not at all”.
This doesn’t answer anything at all! What does it even mean? Are you saying that you have a different translation than the KJV to offer that is superior and supports your view? that somehow Paul is affirming that people resist God’s will, that he was not quoting the very same objection to the doctrines of grace you yourself have made?
What does it mean to say “You will say to me, why does he yet find fault? for who has resisted his will?” Do you have an answer for that that doesn’t involve taking a single phrase out of context? Can you explain how it fits in with anything you have said? Unless your reading of the preceding passages leads you to object “why doth he yet find fault?”, then it’s false, no matter how long you beat around the bush.
It is also your misconception that supposes that because God ordains some to eternal life, that those ordained do not necessarily believe.”
Act_13:48 And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed.
I simply read the scripture in its proper order. Those who are ordained, believe. Those who are quickened, are made to seek. I do not believe that no one believes in anything. I simply argue that the origin of the belief is in the “ordaining” or “appointing” of God, given to them before the world began. So what do I care if you quote a phrase that has someone seeking or believing, when I never denied that the elect seek and believe as a result of the working of God? How many times do I have to repeat this for you until you believe me and stop arguing with ghosts?
“Jacob and Esau, as we saw earlier, illustrate how that we must accept our lot in life because God will use us to accomplish whatever purpose He has designed us to fulfill. If we resist, He accomplishes His will through our destruction.”
This simply has no relation at all to the actual words of Romans 9. You say “as we saw earlier.” What I saw earlier was nothing more than unbiblical speculation without any specific address of the scripture.
Paul in this section is not talking about a moral illustration about free-will and how God regards our decisions to follow Him. Instead, Paul teaches that it is God’s decision made before “the children being... born, neither having done any good or evil,” so that “the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of Him that calleth” (Rom 9:11). This is why the reply to these passages from Paul’s hypothetical adversary is ‘Why doth he yet find fault?”, since they were elected by God to their fates before either had committed any faults to begin with! Therefore Paul’s adversary objects, “why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will?”, because no one can resist the decree of God, so how can God blame them?
And instead of answering with some complicated nonsense explaining how it’s only a misconception based on perspective, like what you suggested, He replies with a rebuke for daring to talk back to God in the first place:
Rom 9:20 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?
And instead of going into a man-exalting discussion of personal liberty, he declares God’s absolute sovereignty to “have mercy on whom [He] will have mercy, and... have compassion on whom [He] will have compassion” (Rom 9:15).
And instead of telling us how it is necessary for man to make that first step to believe in Christ, Paul tells you that it is NOT of Him who wills, nor of him who “runs,” but of God who has mercy:
Rom 9:16 So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy.
Your nonsense about this being an illustration in favor of personal liberty simply cannot survive a line by line analysis of this text.
“The object lesson in the garden of Eden”
This is why your entire argument is false. It’s based on this absurd false premise. In the garden of Eden, man did not fall until he ate of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. After the fall, certain terrible changes occurred in mankind:
First, they are now spiritually dead.
Gen 2:16-17 And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.
Because of this death, unless they are quickened, they cannot enter the Kingdom of God:
Joh 3:5-7 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.
Eph 2:1-3 And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins; Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience: Among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others.
Col 2:13 And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses;
And it is for this cause that it is necessary for the Holy Spirit to reveal that Jesus is the Christ:
1Co_12:3 ... no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost.
Because, even in the presence of miraculous signs and wonders, it is impossible for the human mind to conceive of these things himself:
Mat 16:17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.
Your argument is essentially that we have the same freedom that we had before we were dead in sin. But the truth is that we are a utterly depraved and dead race due to the sin of Adam:
Job 15:14-16 What is man, that he should be clean? and he which is born of a woman, that he should be righteous? Behold, he putteth no trust in his saints; yea, the heavens are not clean in his sight. How much more abominable and filthy is man, which drinketh iniquity like water?
Psa 130:3 If thou, LORD, shouldest mark iniquities, O Lord, who shall stand?
Psa 143:2 And enter not into judgment with thy servant: for in thy sight shall no man living be justified.
Pro 20:9 Who can say, I have made my heart clean, I am pure from my sin?
Ecc 7:20 For there is not a just man upon earth, that doeth good, and sinneth not.
Isa 64:6 But we are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags; and we all do fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away.
Jer 13:23 Can the Ethiopian change his skin or the leopard its spots? Then may you also do good who are accustomed to do evil.
Joh 3:19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.
Now to Romans 3:
Rom 3:9-12 What then? are we better than they? No, in no wise: for we have before proved both Jews and Gentiles, that they are all under sin; As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one: There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God. They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one.
In objection to this above passage, you wrote that Paul was not speaking permanently. That no man “seeks” God, until they eventually do (so why did Paul even bother to say it in his indictment of ALL mankind?). So then it follows that all men sin, until they choose to stop sinning. All men are wicked, until they choose to be righteous. Or, that all men are wicked, until they become righteous. But the scriptural response is, it is God who works in us both to will and to do, contrary to our nature, and therefore our righteousness is not our own, but God’s:
Php_2:13 For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure.
Isa_26:12 LORD, thou wilt ordain peace for us: for thou also hast wrought all our works in us.
And in this way there is no contradiction to the passage with other scriptures, and the passage again has a rational purpose in its demonstration of man’s total depravity without God, which your reading steals from it.
“But again, Christ is using a figure of speech for emphasis. We are not saved because we a smart enough, wise enough, clever enough, righteous enough, or some other enough to CHOOSE. We are saved because He chose to save us. He did not have to. He chose to”
What is the figure of speech? You haven’t actually bothered to explain it. You just say it’s a “figure of speech” because you can’t explain it. You then assert, without addressing the actual words of the scripture, that it is about God’s general decision to die for our sins. But the words of the scripture show it is a personal decision on Christ’s part on behalf of the individual saint, to ordain them to faith and good works (fruit).
“Ye have not chosen me,” Christ declares. You, personally, have not chosen Jesus Christ. He corrects them from falsely believing that they came to Him of their own accord, that they believed through their own “flesh and blood.” This is the same point Christ makes when He responds to Peter’s confession in Matt 16:17. “Flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.”
Christ goes on, “but I have chosen you.” He emphasizes the fact that they did not really choose Him. It was Christ who chose them, which directly led to their following. Because “the sheep hear my voice, and follow me.”
“And ordained you, that ye should go and bring forth fruit, and that your fruit should remain.” How can anything man do remain? Our total depravity makes it impossible for us to to any good work that can remain eternally:
Isa 64:6 But we are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags; and we all do fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away.
Therefore, if our work is to remain, it is necessary that the work comes from God, and not of ourselves. It is “ordained... that your fruit should remain: that whatsoever ye shall ask of the Father in my name, He may give it to you” (John 15:16). We are reconciled to God, by God’s own sovereign choice, so that we should Be His people, and He our God.
“They could not believe at that time and onward. This is the result of their hardening their hearts to the truth.”
As is usual, you wrest the scripture, giving only one sentence in reply to a passage that is fatal to your long-winded post, and then going off on with endless paragraphs about things I have neither argued for or against in a vain attempt to escape it.
This is not a case of someone receiving it from the Father, and then rejecting it, and therefore they become hardened. They simply weren’t given it at all:
“But there are some of you that believe not,” says Christ, “Therefore,” as a result, because of, an explanation for their unbelief, “said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father.” Unless God gives it to Him, He cannot believe. He does not say “my Father gave it to them and they resisted it.” He says that it was never given to them at all, and that is the reason they do not believe.
It is because of these scriptures that your endless paragraphs, your random arguments against things that I never said in the first place, simply cannot stand.
“Who does the Holy Spirit convict of sin? Just the elect? No. The world is convicted. This is a spiritual revelation to the natural realm.”
Joh 16:8-10 And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment: (9) Of sin, because they believe not on me; (10) Of righteousness, because I go to my Father, and ye see me no more;
Your arguments here, as usual, don’t actually even touch upon the doctrines of grace. It says nothing about election. It says “of sin, because they believe not on me.” This is their great sin, their unbelief in Jesus Christ despite His many works and wonders, the Prophets, and His righteousness. Light has come “into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.” But it does not follow that because they are in condemnation for their own sins, that suddenly the elect elect themselves, rather than by the will of God:
Joh 1:13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.
“We do not read of hell being prepared for the Devil, his angels, AND the non-elect humans.”
Rom 9:21-22 Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour? 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:
Jud_1:4 For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ.
1Pe 2:7-8 Unto you therefore which believe he is precious: but unto them which be disobedient, the stone which the builders disallowed, the same is made the head of the corner, (8) And a stone of stumbling, and a rock of offence, even to them which stumble at the word, being disobedient: whereunto also they were appointed.
“He doesn’t create them to be destroyed.”
Rom 9:17 For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth.
Rom 9:20-21 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? Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?
“It is a result of uncooperative clay. “
Completely ridiculous! Why would Paul use the metaphor of the clay to begin with? The purpose of likening us to clay is to demonstrate the power and sovereign right of the potter to “form” us for whatever purpose He desires. Either, in the case of the damned, to make them vessels “fitted for destruction.” Or in the case of the elect, to make them “vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory.” The “afore prepared,” really, is the only real difference between the elect and those who are not elect. The elect are chosen before the world began; the damned are merely fitted for destruction, “prepared” for it, as they need no particular work on God’s part to make them sinners. They are, by nature, the enemies of God, by their own sinful choices.
“If you go back and read what I said carefully,”
Suppose I read everything you wrote very carefully, and took the time to write up a reply to every little thing you wrote, what would be the purpose? It is only because you misunderstand my argument that your posts are so long.