Arminians on Romans 9 | Doug Wilson
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 28 июн 2024
- In this episode of Ask Doug, pastor Douglas Wilson discusses the Arminian view on Romans 9 compared to the Reformed/Calvinist view.
For more theology from Douglas Wilson, please visit us at canonpress.com
Check out Doug's book on Calvinism, "Easy Chairs, Hard Words" here:
canonpress.com/products/easy-chairs-hard-words/
Doug I always enjoy your perspective. But you said you
" surrendered " humbled. " yourself " to the text ,,, does that go in direct contradiction to Calvin.. Where all things are determinedly decreed ( ordained )
By God ? Did you submit or where you submitted ?
It would appear by your own statement that you exercised
Free will.
Just an observation !
@@stephenkeener9565 by the grace of the Holy Spirit did Doug submit to the text. Calvinist do not deny free will, but that it is the Spirit that makes one willing.
THERE'S NO SUCH THING AS "CALVINISM." One should use "Reformed" instead. I'm always amazed and frustrated at how any professing Christian, especially one of dear Doug's (as well as Piper's) stature, should continue the dishonest "calvinism" moniker that not only unbiblically contradicts the prohibition of men's names of 1 Corinthians 1 but hypocritically is contrary to Calvin himself who succeeded where Luther ultimately failed in refusing to allow himself to be so exalted.
@@russedav5 That is literally the first thing Doug addresses in his book "Easy Chairs, Hard Words." You should check it out.
@@stephenkeener9565God brought him to that place & time of humility & steered his will to surrender, in God's own timing.
I often said that I was predestined to be an Arminian. But about six years ago (I am now 62) whine reading Romans 9, I could no longer cling to my feeble attempt at claiming my own decision in my salvation. In all honesty since the Holy Spirit convicted me, I now see God’s infinite love and sovereignty shining brighter from the pages of Scripture. I do not like this aspect of God’s sovereignty (predestination) but it has opened my eyes to see Scripture in a whole new light.
If you thought that your own decision caused your salvation, then you were not an Arminian in any real sense. Arminius never taught that and his closest followers never taught that.
The real problem with Calvinism is not the salvation, but do not give opportunitie of salvation for all.
That’s a real issue with God’s personality.
@@gilneiherber9406 that’s a problem for the non Calvinist even more. For if each person has to make a choice, then what do you do with those who never heard? There are many people who lived and died in areas before the Gospel was proclaimed to their people group. Does that make God unjust because he never allowed people to hear and respond to the Gospel?
@@gilneiherber9406 Many are called, few are chosen.
@@jodyhart1205 for those whom died before Jesus, is a fact that God will judge with Justice.
Some will say that Jesus preached to them between his death and His resurrection.
Again: God put every human under the curse of sin, to use His mercy with everyone Rm 11:32.
How about 1 Tm 1:4-6? I don’t think this passage is mentioning saved or elected, because it would not make much sense.
But again, I may have a problem, maybe other believers don’t.
I have only one question:
- In your opinion, what comes first; the predestination or Jesus sacrifice? Not discussing what God’s has to say about it, but for you, what’s you perspective?
Not all Israel is Israel.
Very much like the difference between the "visible church" and the "truly saved"
How to differentiate between the 2 ( visible church /truly saved)
Simple question , did you choose to follow Jesus ?
@@Charlie-xp9lq Not sure how to differentiate, but "You will know them by their fruit" and "They went out from us because they were not of us" are two ways that Scripture give us.
Did I choose? well in one way, yes I did, but only because my eyes were opened to the truth of Jesus.
I didn't give myself that sight and I certainly didn't give myself a heart that would respond to it.
@@bpstuff4261 When we look at the situation where you point out that your eyes were opened and your heart was changed ( by forces outside of yourself , I think you are saying ) then the choosing is a forgone conclusion also outside of yourself.
I find these scriptures interesting with regards to salvation.
No one can come to the Father but by his Son .
No one can come to the Son unless the Father Draws him . I look at my own experience coming to Christ and there is no way I was looking to become a Christian , I was a very devout atheist who had a hatred for Christians and felt they were lilly livered and weak . After getting Saved I looked back over the past few years and could see a lot of marker points that lead me to hear the Gospel . It's a very humbling experience.
Yes, John 6 is exactly what I was thinking about when I typed.
It is the Father's doing.
Just like Jesus said it was to Peter.
[15 He said to them, “But who do you say that I am?” 16 Simon Peter replied, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” 17 And Jesus answered him, “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven.
@@bpstuff4261 That is a very good scripture you bought up.
Paul's pointing out that not all Israel are Israel paints a very clear picture when we get to Romans 11 . This chapter also ties in with what you said about your eyes being opened to the truth .
When Paul gets to the part where he states that all Israel is Saved, have a look at how blown away he is by this Revelation.
Very good! When the national argument was presented to me once, I responded, "that is like saying it is possible to bake an apple pie without baking any of the individual apples"
Because you missed the point bro. Go read the original quotes in the Old Testament Paul references and you can see his point.
@@jordandthornburg That’s a common Arminian argument: none of the verses that Paul quotes actually means what Paul says they mean. For instance, Paul quotes Genesis in Romans 9:12 and Malachi in Romans 9:13. He quotes these OT passages simply to point out that God chose Jacob and not Esau. The point isn’t about “serving” or “Love versus Hate.” That’s taking us very far afield from Paul’s argument. He’s simply showing that God chose one and not the other. But Arminians will go into this long study of the quoted passages to simply say that neither of those passages really mean what Paul says they mean. Let’s take the Malachi quote. Calvinists and Arminians will argue all day long about whether or not God actually hated Esau. Calvinists, of course, says that it means what it says. Arminians, however, will argue that Malachi was referring to Edom, and not Esau in particular. For years, I thought that was a dumb argument. Why is it better that God hates a whole nation of people rather than just one person? For the Arminian there’s a two-fold answer: 1) Paul’s argument that started off with God choosing between two twin brothers has now become about God choosing between two nations (which changes the debate from God choosing individuals for salvation to God choosing which nation will serve him), and 2) Edom was a cruel and evil nation and, according to the Arminian, deserved God’s hatred (which negates Paul’s argument that God’s choice was prior to Esau’s birth and irrespective of his having done good or evil). Arminians wield the OT passages that Paul quotes as hammers to try to change the nature of Paul’s argument. Their explanation of Pharaoh and his hardening makes the same point. The Arminian will argue that Pharaoh hardened his own heart and that God only hardened it later, as a judicial response to Pharaoh’s own hardening. I think one could certainly argue with how they read the story generally. But what is clear is that when Paul quotes Exodus and refers to Pharaoh’s hardening, it isn’t to say that Pharaoh hardened his own heart. That is clearly not the argument he is making. He never says that in Romans 9. He only point out God’s ability to harden hearts. Why? Because Romans 9-10 is laying a theological foundation for understanding Romans 11 where Paul says that God purposefully blinded the nation of Israel so that the Gospel would go to the Gentiles and that they could be grafted into the tree of salvation. Paul tells us that once the fullness of the Gentiles has been achieved, God will take away Israel’s blindness to the Gospel. By reinterpreting Paul’s point about Pharaoh’s hardening, the Arminians make Romans 11 virtually unintelligible. Arminians use the context of the original quotes to try to completely invalidate or change the nature of Paul’s argument. God didn’t really hate Esau (He hated Edom) and God didn’t really harden Pharaoh (he hardened himself). They simply say that Paul didn’t understand the context of the passages he was quoting.
@@toddstevens9667 the argument is Paul didn’t rip the passages out of context. The Calvinist view requires that understanding. My view does not so it is superior. Also the “it means what it says” arguments means nothing. It isn’t helpful in discussion
@@toddstevens9667 you really have no idea what the non Calvinist reading of those passages is. I can tell by your words.
@@jordandthornburg I have been reading non-Calvinist arguments about Romans 9-11 literally since before your parents were born. And I’m not a Calvinist either. I have a very non-Calvinist understanding of these chapters. I was listening to Mark Dever, a Calvinist, preach a summary sermon on Romans 9 earlier this week. He was talking about the inscrutability of God’s purposes in election from verse 11. I was like, “It’s quite scrutible, because Paul tells us precisely why He’s elected some, and hardened other, Israelites in Romans 11: 1-11. The key to these chapters is simply following Paul’s argument. He lays it out step-by-step. It’s not even hard to follow. But Arminians and Calvinists both get it wrong because their theology forces them to make it say something it’s not saying. Paul is simply trying to explain that national Israel’s rejection of the Messiah and the Gospel was a reflection of the fact that there are two Israels: a national, ethnic Israel and a another Israel that he calls “a remnant” in verse 27, that is elect (see 9:6, “… they are not all Israel, which are of Israel”). This is made even clearer in 11:5. So chapters 9-11 is simply an explanation of these two Israels: one elect, the other hardened. Eventually, once the fullness of the Gentiles have been brought into the remnant, God will take the blindness away from national, ethnic Israel, and all Israel will be saved (11: 25-26). Arminians are right that it’s about national Israel, in that it’s explaining why Israel, as a nation, is not saved. And Calvinist are right that it’s about election and hardening of individual Jews and Gentiles. But it isn’t about how God chose Israel over the Ishmaelites and the Edomites. And it’s not about God picking and choosing from all humanity who gets saved and who gets damned. Those arguments, from both camps, need to be made from other scriptures because they aren’t addressed in Romans 9-11. Anyway, enjoy your day Jordan. And I really have been reading explanations of Romans 9-11 since before your parents were born. I’m very old. Lol.
Please release a revised and updated edition of Easy Chairs Hard Words! :)
This was good. I am only a recent Reformed thinker and it feels a lot to me that in the past, I would probably have read some of these sections almost like a kid with my fingers in my ears. Like the part of my brain that even came close to thinking that the text says what it says and therefore there is a challenging side to God that I have to accept, would just get booted back in line by the “God is all love” “God loves everyone” NICE GOD part of my brain.
Now I accept that God is love, righteous, just, Holy etc...but he also allows/wills for bad things to happen.
It’s quite mind blowing but so much more seems to make sense now!
It would be be better for you to read those passages with fingers in your ears, if they would lead you to believe that God is not All-Loving and desires every single man to come to repentance and be saved. Paul is being rhetorical, he was educated as a pharisee and is making legal argumentation, not necessarily being completely doctrinal.
@@bodysuit1134 show much love for Hittites?
@@bodysuit1134
Do you believe Jesus' blood was shed for the sin every man, of all time? Likewise with His death? Then do you believe that all men are saved?
@@toddcote4904 yes Christ died for all, no not all are saved. There is no contradiction. God doesn't force anyone to do anything and there is no coercion in love. Man's nature did not, all of a sudden, with the fall, become like water. Just apply irresistible grace (or heat if you will) and it will be saved(or boil, if you will). Man is intelligent and free and must choose, not just to believe but to be faithful to God every day. In His Body and Blood, Christ lives in us, only those who eat His Flesh and drink His blood are promised eternal life.
@@bodysuit1134
Saying "there is no contradiction" does not make it so.
The scriptures are extremely clear, that the blood of Jesus cleanses or covers sin. If this "happened" for everyone, then everyone's sin has been covered, and therefore saved. (See Isaiah 53 and Rev 5:8)
So now the contradiction, "If every man's sin has been covered by the blood, yet not everyone is saved as you claim, then why are people being thrown into the lake of fire for their sin?"
Every unbeliever will be in the lake of fire for their own works, which are sinful, which clearly Jesus did NOT cover.
Rev 20:12 - And I saw the dead, small and great, standing before God, and books were opened. And another book was opened, which is the Book of Life. And the dead were >>>judged according to their works
finally a reformed person who agrees with me! i thought the text was obvious but it seems that most reformed guys put a wall around chapter 9 and ignore the flow of argumentation
Check out James White on that too. He brings chapter 8 right into the breakdown of chp 9
Yeah, I was shocked by this too.
Doug explained my experience exactly. 👏🏽
Very helpful
Thanks for watching Bob!
Would Douglas Wilson be open to debating Leighton Flowers on this chapter or John 6?
Lol. It wouldn't be exegetical. Mr. Flowers can only tell stories from real examples, attempting to tie the Holy Scriptures to the stories he tells, rather than deriving the meaning from the text. This debate, Leighton and Romans 9, was handled by James White. He handled it extremely well! Where Dr. White whooped up on him, more than a little. The text is too straight forward for Leighton to twist while Brother White was holding him to the Holy Script. It was embarrassing! Check out "Red Grace", where Brother Emilio Ramos and the Crew uploaded it here on You tube. But, you did hear a part in this video where Doug was told to "put that [the Holy Scriptures] away"; that is what the debate would be, Again. Enjoy Friend!
I think Leighton flowers is had enough debate whoopin. Hes not coming back for more anytime soon.
@@billyr9162 , Grace, Peace, n LOVE In Our HOLY KING, YaHWeH YESHUA. You are correct, Brother! So, You watched it? Maybe i should have pointed out Elder Brother White's handling John 6 with Leighton, as well. Or, my own dialogue with Leighton (out of many); while i do Not wish to point out anything having to do with myself, it would be helpful for him [and all] to see.
Have Ya noticed he only throws stones, at Us Orthodox Brethren, Monergists especially? This IS his 'ministry', twisting Holy Scripture to the Destruction of his Demise. It is sad, and i mean - it Truly Saddens me to see someone professing CHRIST with a Solid Profession. But, unfortunately, especially in speaking with him, i see no good fruit, only attacks on Faithfully Obedient Biblical CHRISTians. He has fashioned a 'god' of his own in his own mind.
@@Chirhopher
Thanks. You're asking me did I watch the Roman 9 debate with Flowers and White? Yes of course. Many times.
You're right. It really is said. Hes going down swinging.
I’m not sure I watched the same debate as you all because Flowers beat White handily.
One of many passages that really whacked me upside the head was Jn 10:26 and surrounding...
But ye believe not: for ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you. - John 10:26 GNV
It hit me that He did not say you are not my sheep because you don't believe but rather you don't believe because you are not of my sheep. Pow!
Of course no one text is a stand alone proof but I began to see that same kind of theme repeated all through the scripture.
Lol! I was at war over Calvanism, hating it. I was at Logos School and overheard Doug mention he had to become will for it to be true. God used his comment to another person to repeatedly poke me in the heart repeatedly. I realized even if the Calvanists were mistaken they were far more obedient as they were willing for this awful doctrine to be true. Then I broke before the Lord dropped to my knees and prayed, "If this is true, you can make me love it more than I hate it". And, He did :-)
Did you ever think to ask yourself why this doctrine is so repulsive to people who have been filled with Gods spirit and made new internally and given the mind of Christ? Does that not seem somewhat odd to you?
@@jordandthornburg To be fair, unbelievers find the doctrine of predestination and election to be laughable and repulsive. By no means am I saying that true Christians dont struggle with these truths but to base truth on the subjective feelings of others is wrong.
@@Matthew-zc5ix if you read my comment carefully you would see I said spirit filled believers. I never mentioned anything about unbelievers nor was I excluding myself from that group. It’s offensive to all alike. We should listen to that testimony and examine it. Our feelings are not worthless. They can often point in true directions.
@@jordandthornburg I do understand your statement. My question to you is, isn’t strange that an unbeliever and a professing Christian can feel the same way about a doctrine? I am not trying to be divisive, my friend, but we are not fully sanctified in our minds to be claiming that our hearts lead us in truth. I hope I am being clear 🙏
@@Matthew-zc5ix no it isn’t strange. Our understanding clearly has a common source and we have the same creator. That points exactly to my point, that it is not a doctrine from God.
Late to the party, but I sure appreciate Doug Wilson. God saves each soul, and no one tailgates into heaven (no matter what nation they are a part of).
This video provided a very good point for me. If you want to find out the truth be open to follow where the text will lead. And if you want to be a calvanist read commentators of the Bible.
It's unfortunate that people will listen to commentary and accept it more then what the word says.
Especially those people that like to say don't make a dogma out of a single text and look at context but only accept that view when it doesn't pertain their view point.
FYI not Arminian nor calvinist.
I think both sides are looking at the exact same coin and arguing about what they each see but these two theories in their simplest forms possibly speak about the same thing
1 side is the unequivocal authority and initiative of God to help humanity find salvation thru faith, and the steadfast promise of God that NO ONE will take you forcefully from His hands.
And the 2nd side the responsibility of the person to charish the freedom given to him by Christ and finish the race that was started and remain faithful to the end while God will do His work and melt and shape you into the vessel He wants you to be in His Kingdom.
No one will separate you from God, expect you chose to walk away from Him on your own account. He forces no one.
The forces Paul is talking about that won't seperate us are all mostly external forces not the internal ones.
That's why Jesus says a house split in itself can not stand. As soon as those outside forces of evil come into you again and take control of you thru sin you are now a divided house.
That's why Jesus always said you must take up your cross, denie self, you must Die so that you might live.
I’ve never met someone who walked away from God and while knowing Him. It’s always the people that claimed he never existed.
You only have to believe the Bible as written to be a "Calvinist." Jesus said that he will not lose one that the father gives him.
MacArthurs commentary on Romans is excellent
Yesss
What’s your commentary on Romans
While loving Jacob and hating Esau may very well pertain corporately to the nations of Israel and Edom, it also pertains to the individual persons of Jacob and Esau themselves. The entire story of Jacob in the old testament shows God's love toward Jacob and not Esau and the analogy is based on the individuals before being applied to the nations.
Totally agree. Why must we read more into the verse than is there. The verse is VERY CLEAR.
Very much. Jacob was a terrible person, who God showed unbelievable mercy towards.
God elects corporately based up His sovereign will. God elects individuals based upon His foreknowledge.
@@harrylime9611
Good morning, What exactly do you mean by foreknowledge?
@@nando7522 I mean that God is the author of sin and forces people to love him.
This is very good. Because all those people out there trying to say Romans 9 is all about Israel are correct. But that doesn't mean it's not about salvation and of individuals as well.
It's about individuals as verse 11 cleary says.....along with if it's about Nations, Nations are made up of a people! So God loved nations and hated nations! Arminians don't like the God of the scriptures and his sovereign choice.
@@teemu1381
Yep
It can be about individuals but it's not about salvation in the sense of God choosing some for hell and some for heaven . It's about Israel and them being hardened. That's it
@@MrBazinthenow
It can't be about just hardening Israel otherwise the talk about mercy and compassion would only refer to one's life on earth. The word us in chapter 8 referring to those who are glorified and justified would leave out the gentiles. That wouldn't make any sense at all at the time Paul wrote it.
If you think it's only about hardening Israeli people then at the very least free will for thousands of Jews just went right out the window.
@@billyr9162 Mercy is not salvation .. its mercy
I sure thought the problem Paul is trying to explain is why not all Israel is Israel. And how there is elect individuals inside of Israel. Hence Jacob and Esau...
W Jeremiah speaking of The HOLY n SOVEREIGN POTTER and Us, the Clay. GOD has Kingly Freedom to Elect and Adopt who HE Chooses (based solely off HIS Own Character and Choice) or Prepare a vessel of HIS for Destruction, if HE so Pleases -and indeed HE Does! Some to the Praise of HIS Righteous Nature in Holy Judgement and some to the Praise of HIS Glorious Grace; All to HIS Glory!
ChîRhôpher Lazarus
What kind of vessels does God prepare for destruction?....
Jer 18: 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.
That’s in line with His character. He makes a vessel according to their doings.
2Tim 2: 20 ¶ But in a great house there are not only vessels of gold and of silver, but also of wood and of earth; and some to honour, and some to dishonour.
21 If a man therefore purge himself from these, he shall be a vessel unto honour, sanctified, and meet for the master's use, and prepared unto every good work.
That’s how His justice is manifested. By judging everyone by the path they choose.
@@evanu6579 thanks for sharing this brother. Your exegesis I have never heard before.
@@user-gx4wi4cv2m
Thanks brother.
That’s what He did with Israel....
Rom 11:4 But what saith the answer of God unto him? I have reserved to myself seven thousand men, who have not bowed the knee to the image of Baal.
5 Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace.
6 And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work.
7 ¶ What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded
8 (According as it is written, God hath given them the spirit of slumber, eyes that they should not see, and ears that they should not hear;) unto this day.
9 ¶ And David saith, Let their table be made a snare, and a trap, and a stumblingblock, and a recompence unto them:
10 Let their eyes be darkened, that they may not see, and bow down their back alway.
Some of Israel was given mercy and some were hardened.....
Rom 9:18 Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth.
19 ¶ 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?
Paul is explaining how that not all Israel is of Israel. Look at Rom 11 as to the purpose of Israel’s hardening and compare it to Rom 9 purpose for hardening Pharaoh.
Israel is one lump made into two vessels.
Lots of scripture from the OT that shows what sort of Israelite would be hardened and what sort would receive mercy. It wasn’t unconditional by any means. If you like, I can point you to some scripture on that as well.
God bless.
Two things:
First, his airplane analogy (1:24) needs to be fleshed out a bit. "The Bible nowhere says that God predestined that this man die in a fiery plane crash. God only predestined that the plane would crash, not that the passengers would... These corporate entities are made up of individuals." This assumes that God also predestined who would be on which plane, which, of course, is the point of contention. This is called the fallacy of "begging the question."
Secondly, he assumes, a (wrong) Calvinistic interpretation of Romans 9:6 without discussion (3:00). He assumes that "it is not as though the word of God has failed" means "it is not as though God was trying to effectively save all Israel and couldn't." In other words, going back to the plane analogy, he assumes that the destination of the plane, what Israel was elected for, is effectual salvation. It isn't. Israel was elected to bring the word of God, meaning the Law, the promises, the covenenants, and most importantly, the Christ, to the world. This plan, this "word of God" has not failed. The plane is still on its way and will still land safely at its destination. Its just that many who think they are in it, are actually in the other plane, the plane that is opposing this plan, and is destined to crash in the ocean.
The main point Paul makes in Romans 9 is that the physical descendants of Israel, most of them anyway, have ceased to be in the correct plane. They are now in the "Esau" plane, because they are opposing God's purpose in electing Israel. It's true, he still uses them to accomplish his purpose, but he uses them as a potter uses a pre-hardened lump of clay, as a dishonorable vessel (ie. using hardened Jewish leaders to hand Jesus over for crucifixion). God is also allowed, says Paul, to withhold judgement ("He bore with great patience") on rebels, to accomplish his purposes. The objector had said, "Why does he find fault? For who has resisted his will?" In other words, "If God is using me for his purpose, then I must be faultless!" Paul's explanation, far from being, "God elects to damnation and you're not allowed to ask why!" is really, "God is being patient with you and using your hardened condition for his purposes. He has every right to do so." Going back to the plane analogy, it is comforting to know that, for individuals "take off" isn't until we die or the Lord returns. Paul admonishes his fellow Jews, "switch planes, before it's too late!" Thankfully he goes on to explain that the bulk of his nation will, one day, switch planes, coming back into being vessels of honor. (Romans 11:26, 2 Tim 2:20,21)
Lol... "God only predestined the plane would crash not the people in it."
Right!!!
God determines where the tornadoes and the hurricanes and the floods and the earthquakes are too. Those darn people just keep getting in the way.
You are also assuming (wrong) that "it is not as though the word of God has failed" is only referring to the "plane landing". The next 2 phrases in the verse explains more what it means. The text says "not all from Israel belong to Israel" and " not all are children of Abraham". These 2 phrases makes no sense using your analogy of the plan if salvation. Those phrases are referring to effectual salvation.
@@jonah6449 I appreciate the engagement with my comment. Just a quick word of clarification. When the text says, "Not all from Israel are Israel," I'm saying that this means, "Not all descending from the man Israel (Jacob) are "Israel" in the sense of being the ones carrying out God's plan as described in 9:4,5."
The next two phrases in verses 6 and 7, I'm saying, ought to be understood this way:
"It is not as though the Word of God (law, covenants, promises, etc from 9:4,5) has failed (to accomplish its God-given purposes). It might seem that, with the Israel failing, all that God meant to accomplish through them will fail also. (similarly to 3:3 - Does their faithlessness nullify the faithfulness of God?) But they won't! The ones failing, yes they're physical descendants of Jacob, but they aren't "Israel" in the sense of being the ones to carry out the purposes of God. Abraham had two natural sons, but Ishmael was not a child "of the promise" like Isaac was. Same thing with Jacob and Esau, only Jacob was a child of the promise. Similarly, my fellow Jews, the ones who today are in rebellion, are like Esau and Ishmael, children of the flesh, yes, but not "Israel" in the sense of being children of the promise."
This explains why Paul cites Malachi 1:2.3. The Edomites, despite being descendants of Esau and thus of Abraham, were opposing the plan of God, persecuting the Israelites, and were thus rejected (hated) by God. The same thing is going on with the Jews of Paul's day. They are not really "Israel," despite being "from Israel."
I hope, even if you disagree, this makes my view a little clearer.
@@kentyoung5282 It's interesting that you did not mention the adoption as one of the thing listed in Rom 9:4-5..
In Romans 8:15, Paul says that we have received the Spirit of adoption as sons. This same Spirit bears witness that we are children of God.
Also, the golden chain of redemption is actually referring to those who have receive the Spirit of adoption which means that those who have been adopted will be justified and glorified since it was the foreordained plan of God.
But also, Paul in Romans 8:33, Paul says
"Who shall bring any charge against God's elect? It is God who justifies." God is the one who justifies even though the Israelites were condemning these Christians.
These passages are not simply talking about a plan of salvation. These passages are referring to:
1) Adoption as sons.
2) Justification
3) Glorification
This is the background or the context Paul is talking about when he moves to chapter 9. To then ignore all of what has been said and just simply switch it to mean a plan of salvation is erroneous.
When the text says that "it is not as if the word of God has failed", it is referring to all the aspect he just finished talking about in Chapter 8 which includes ADOPTION but also promises, covenant, worship, ETC.
@@jonah6449 Thanks for your thoughts once again.
I don't think your point about "adoption" is a very strong one. "Adoption," literally "son placing," is used metaphorically for different things in different contexts. Even in chapter 8, in vs 15 "adoption" describes the Spirit which believers receive that testifies of their child-to-father relationship with God, but in vs 23 it refers to when believers get new bodies in the resurrection. Seems to me in Romans 9:4 "adoption" refers to the unique relationship Israel has with God, as in Hosea 11:1.
No doubt chapter 9 should be read in context, but I think that makes my point rather than yours. The most important contextual issue is how 9 fits in with 10 and 11. To me, it seems like there has never been a more justified chapter break than the one that separates 8 and 9. Paul goes from the pinnacle of joy, using the first person plural, "Nothing can separate US from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord!" to starting chapter 9 by having "sorrow and unceasing anguish" while talking about Israel. In Chapter 8 he uses the first person "we," while in chapter 9 he uses the third person plural "they": "THEIRS is the adoption, the glory, the covenants, etc."
He had been discussing the Jew/Gentile issue from the beginning of the letter (especially looking at chapter 3). But from chapter 5 through 8 he seems to have moved on to developing his teaching about the spiritual life of the believer. Then, when he gets to 9 through 11, he shifts gears quite suddenly in order to complete the Jew/Gentile discussion. A Calvinist interpretation of 9 falls completely apart once you see that the "objects of wrath" and "enemies of God concerning the gospel," are actually rebellious Israel, and far from being reprobated before the foundation of the world, they are actually destined to, as a nation, be saved (11:26). Paul's desire and prayer for them is their salvation (10:1) and he expects, by his preaching to Gentiles, to produce repentance in some of them (11:11). This is why he describes the hardening of Israel as "partial" and temporary (11:25).
From Chapter 9, out-of-context, one might infer that "Esau I hated" means God reprobates people before the foundation of the world, giving them no hope of salvation. But I don't think any fair reader of 9, 10, and 11 would come to that conclusion.
Blessings, Brother.
I love Doug, he is such a godly person and I truly believe he only wants to preach Jesus and nothing more. He loves God and is willing to be blunt and even offensive in his defense of the gospel. I watch all of his videos. But... I disagree with him in this area. I'm in my 60's and have studied the Bible my whole adult life, I have an advanced degree in theology (for what that's worth). I've been a member of Calvinist churches and Arminian churches. The Arminian way of looking at salvation has so much more biblical support it's amazing that anyone who has read the Bible can be a Calvinist. I've found that Calvinist do not take the simple reading of the Bible. They eisegete Calvinistic meaning into the text instead of taking the text for its simple and straightforward meaning.
Really? Calvinists read into the text? Do you mean like that man who wrote Romans 9,16?
If this comment is legit then I’m at a loss of how anyone could go so long and avoid the basic truth of the texts for decades
Thank you for this response, I found it interesting.
When you responded to the point about corporate election, you point out that this necessarily includes individuals, this is certainly true, but the distinctions matter:
If God hates Esau as an individual before he was born, that would be calvinistic.
If He hates Esau as a people, Edom, and will punish them, that of course affects them indivually, but since it is not about salvation (the text is not about salvation but judgement over Edom) they can both be saved and loved as persons within a hated people. An example of this is Ruth, who was a moabite woman. The moabites were as a people under the judgement of God and hated in that sense, yet Ruth found favour in God´s eyes, leaving her people behind.
The point Paul is making in the text is that not all physical decendants are saved. God has chosen to give grace to some and to punish others, just as He in the time of the writing of Romans had shown grace to the apostles and the believers but judged hardened Israel (the pharisées and the leaders).
The second big point of corporate election is that the Bible teaches that we were chosen "in Him" (Jesus), implying we are chosen because we are in Him.
It also says we are predestined according to the foreknowledge of God, claiming something God knows about the future influenced His choice (like faith, being in Him).
Isn't "Jacob I loved, Easu I hated" in Romans 9 from Malachi? Doug said Hosea...
Yes, you are correct.
You're correct.
And talking about the brothers in Romans 9 Paul is actually talking about them personally and individuals, not metaphors of their names as places.
Talking about their mom conceiving them “she was told” that the older will serve the younger.
I don’t know why all these old men keep only using this piece of scripture out of an entire verse in which they never break down the whole statement, just talk about “jacob I loved and Esau I hated “
It’s a bunch of garbage theology they are preaching.
Paul then goes on to say for He says to Moses , I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and compassion on whom I have compassion.
I don’t understand why these so called Arminians only think Gods love is so weak, Gods love also is justice and dealing with sin and not in a nice fashion . God lives all and wants all to be saved. Yes but clearly in this same chapter He talks about only a remnant will be saved.
True Israel are also those considered true Jews, circumcised of the heart and not the flesh, those are the remnant. Any one circumcised of the heart is a true Israelite, even for me a gentile grafted into the holy nation as a true Jew by circumcision of the heart.
Israel was called to be a mothering nation, sharing the love of God to the rest of the world.
Iam not a theologian or a pastor, but I have been saved by Jesus, the Holy Spirit lives in me and I spent hrs in the word daily and wrestle with scripture and commentary’s and watch all these debates, I think many that call themselves Calvinist are usually wrong and don’t know enough and Armenians are also too soft and view God not in a serious enough manner as far as His wrath and as far as true salvation goes.
Are we not followers of Christ, did not apostle Paul himself say to others then I thank God I have not baptized any of you, one says I follow Apollo’s and the other follow Paul , are you not merry human?
Servants through whom you believed, as the Lord assigned to each.
We are Gods fellow workers.
I think it’s about time in history to drop the names and find yourself strictly as Christians under Christ, enough of this iam with this group and that group, all it is is division.
Fall in love with the Word of God to know God as is His will for us, “to know Him”
And you won’t find yourself attached to any one particular group but rather a servant of righteousness under Christ . Praise be to the Lord saving us who have been brought near, drawn in Him to be His light in this dark world.
Who's the name at 4:40?
Isn't the question "Does God decide who gets on what airplane?"
Yes it is. That’s the whole question. Good job for noticing, the thing which he doesn’t deal with at all,
And the answer is: Yes. God does decide that. Your days are numbered.
When trying to understand difficult passages in Romans I like to use "The Gospel of Thomas and Romans Side by Side with Key Word Connections" (posted online). No easy answers, but it helps me to struggle through the text in a way that sees past so many of the contemporary lenses of debate, & to understand afresh with the words of Jesus. Blessing.
Aha. So you use some man made book nobody knows exactly where it came from to "enlighten" you in your understanding of the Word of the Living God?!?
That is sure way to a problem.
seriously! ?
That was a plane crash of a troll effort. You need to charge your Segway.
Gospell of Thomas, is that gospell part of the Bible
@@ishwarbhola The Gospel of Thomas is not in the canonical Bible. However, it may be an extremely early Gospel. It claims to be authored by Jesus himself (Perhaps, just after the resurrection. See Acts 1:3 and the Thomas Prologue). Thomas also purports to have been scribed by Jesus' brother Jude Thomas, who probably also wrote Jude, the second last book in the New Testament. This would mean that Thomas is unique being not only written by Jesus the author and finisher of our faith but is also an early apostolic writing having been scribed by Thomas. This Gospel also appears to be the foundational scripture underpinning the other apostolic writings found within what is often called the New Testament. A search for the elaboration mentioned above: "The Gospel of Thomas and Romans Side by Side with Key Word Connections" is perhaps more relevant to this video's discussion. However, for those interested in a more in-depth examination regarding how this "Testimony of Jesus", which is the spirit of prophecy, inspired the apostolic writers to pen their own letters and Gospels of the New Testament... for these diligent ones and even for myself, it may be helpful to do a search for - "the original gospel authored by Jesus Christ" takethescroll. Blessings on your search for truth.
this is the guy to read/hear/watch: rc sproul
Except that he is woefully inadequate with Philosphy. Not meaning to be snide or disrespectful. Just true.
@@adivorceddaddiary who rc? That’s just utterly false, he has a phd in philosophy and his work on the consequences of ideas is a masterpiece.
All of this is good, but the Jacob and Esau quote is about both Israel and Edom and literally the individuals Jacob and Esau, because in Romans it says "before the twins did anything good or evil".
Why you don't trust heart ?
And who control heart ?
John 1:13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.
@John Trevett, Can you please elaborated the meaning of John 1:13? ... Thank you...
@@reynaldodavid2913Jo What do you think it means? It's pretty straight forward to me.
@@johntrevett2944, I don't think this verse refers to election, nor to Calvinism, nor to Arminianism, but it explains how those who believe in Christ comes to be... What do you think?
@@reynaldodavid2913Jo In the work of regeneration we play no active role at all. It is instead totally a work of God. We see this, for example, when John talks about those to whom Christ gave power to become children of God-they “were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God” (John 1:13). Here John specifies that children of God are those who are “born...of God” and our human will (“the will of man”) does not bring about this kind of birth.
The fact that we are passive in regeneration is also evident when Scripture refers to it as being “born” or being “born again” (James 1:18; 1 Peter 1:3; John 3:3-8). We did not choose to be made physically alive and we did not choose to be born-it is something that happened to us; similarly, these analogies in Scripture suggest that we are entirely passive in regeneration.
This sovereign work of God in regeneration was also predicted in the prophecy of Ezekiel. Through him God promised a time in the future when he would give new spiritual life to his people:
A new heart I will give you, and a new spirit I will put within you; and I will take out of your flesh the heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh. And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes and be careful to observe my ordinances. (Ezek. 36:26-27)
Been researching this subject for well over 20 years and nothing said here was compelling at all. I think he's missing a lot more to this than what he addressed and making statements that I think are based in suttle logically fallacious conclusions. Just my two cents worth.
Researching for 20 years?!
@@toddcote4904 I was referring to the subject of Calvinism overall. I've been a Christian for 44 years and have always had a keen interest in theology, apologetics, and philosophy. My exposure to Calvinism was slow at first and intensified in the last 10 years. Keep in mind, I have a job and have focused a lot on other subjects within the realm of religion, but never the less I have been exposed to the subject of Calvinism for a long time. I've listened to and read from the best Calvinists and I have corresponded with at least two different Calvinist pastors. Not to mention I have Christian friends who are Calvinist. Anyhow, the subject fascinates me.
@@duanehensley8835
What conclusion have you come to?
@@toddcote4904 Let me first say, that this particular subject is a "non-essential" subject and not one I am willing to divide over, however, I have major issues with the Five Points taught by Reformers/Calvinists and do not believe it is Biblical at all. I don't say that lightly since I have high regard for a few Calvinists and one, in particular, being R.C. Sproul who is instrumental in solidifying my faith through his teachings. How about you?
@@duanehensley8835
That's good. I'm glad you wouldn't condemn me then?
I believe the doctrines of grace, all of them. I have many friends, that I consider my brothers, who don't affirm them. I enjoy listening to teachers, like Mike Winger, who don't hold to the doctrines of grace too.
What is one (I'm sure there's many) of the sticking points for you?
These passages must be understood in context:
ROMANS 9: God in his absolute election v.11-16, chose to save by the means of faith and not by works v.30-33 that's Paul's conclusion of everything he has said so far (that's why he put God's election in opposition to "works" v.11, but he didn't say that it is opposition to faith). And he explains more about the same theme in 10:8-9 he says: "this is the word of FAITH WE preach:
IF YOU...believe...will be saved" Not before. that's God's absolute election to save that Paul and the others preached. and he doesn't say 'God will make you believe or God will believe for you without YOU believing. That's why it is with "No difference" v.12-13, (3:22-23) and that's why Paul finishes the explanation of the three chapters with the final purpose of God
" for God has consigned all men to disobedience , that HE may have MERCY on them ALL" (11:32).
EPHESIANS 1: God by His absolute grace and will predestined us in Christ v.4-11, but to be sealed IN Him by the Holy Spirit is "after YOU heard...and believed...v.13.(in greek "believed" is in the active voice which means that the action of the verb is activated by the subject "You"). Again, Paul doesn't say 'God made you believe' but "YOU believed..and in Him were sealed ..." So: GOD chose to save, kowing that PEOPLE would believe(God didn't ignore that, that's why He PREdestined).And since He had no obligation that salvation be through faith, by providing that it be by this means "HE chose" by His absolute grace to give us the opportunity to believe, so that WE may believe.
ROMANS 8:28- the word "foreknew" only means to know before hand. for ex: in John 5:42 Jesus said to the jews who tried to kill Him " i KNOW you..."(same greek word in Rom.8:29) but He doesn't mean that He had an intimate relationship with them.
And also we were not justified before the creation of the world, in 4:2-3 Paul already explained that "Abraham believed God and it was credited to him as righteousness" Not before.(and the action of the verb "believed" was made by Abraham ) And the way Abraham was justified is a pattern for all of us v.9- 25, "for all nations" (Gal.3:8).
.Also : the Bible says that there's no boasting when we believe Rom.3:27-28, 4:2-3, because faith is according to His grace. 4:16.
Honestly, I could not tell whether this guy is Calvinistic or Arminian.
Doug, what about Romans 11 when the same individuals are said not to have stumbled beyond recovery? Or the (same) cut off Israelites of Romans 9 which can be provoked to envy and saved if they leave their unbelief? Aren't you "trusting your heart" on this rather than looking at the text?
ruclips.net/video/YTSEh1o8HdE/видео.html&app=desktop&fbclid=IwAR3OR4hrmu91wuoMb6CBrlvyEojqIMgNtO1msbQS_2ZnUuYpOWpo82WuBEI
Nathan Franckhauser Exactly! Calvinists love to shove Romans 11 under the rug, despite that chapter being Paul’s conclusion to that particular point he’s making.
Seems to me that if Rom9-11 is ONLY about corporate election, then every man/woman/child who is a Jew will be saved (after all, isn't Israel corporately saved in charge 11?)
And since we know all Jews will not be saved, it can't be only about corporate election, otherwise it breaks the Golden Chain of Redemption.
The place where Doug goes wrong with his “plane crash” analogy is that corporate salvation is independent from personal salvation. National Israel was chosen to be God’s chosen people. Does that mean that all Jews of Israel were saved? Not at all. Many Jews in Israel were damned due to a lack of faith. Edom and Moab were excluded from their covenant. Are all of them damned? Not at all. A plane can crash but still have survivors.
Indignation forever?
Even though Edom has said,
“We have been impoverished,
But we will return and build the desolate places,”
Thus says the Lord of hosts:
“They may build, but I will throw down;
They shall be called the Territory of Wickedness,
And the people against whom the Lord will have indignation forever.
That’s exactly where he does not go wrong and precisely what he’s addressing lol
It seems like the purpose for chapter 9 of Romans is a widening Of the means for salvation not a narrowing.
Any attempt to understand Romans 9 without reading all of 8-11 is ill-fated.
As a Molinist with Calvinist leanings it is interesting to hear the difference in interpretation. Doug is closer to William Lane Craig on Romans 9 as opposed to a John Piper explanation of Romans 9, who is remarkably different from an Arminian. I Love that God is so profound that we can argue passages like this and we get to wrestle together in an attempt to come to a deeper understanding of God’s nature and character.
Amen to that
Molinism and calvinism isnt compatible
@@junkerjorg6310 I'm not saying I am a 50/50. I am a Molinist but enjoy some shared tenets between the two
Paul summed up Romans 9 very simply in verses 30-33. Romans 9 is not framed around the calvinist idea of unconditional election. There is a clear message found in Romans that God justifies those who believe in Christ. If unconditional election was true it would be taught in other Epistles, by Jesus or the other apostles. But it's not, rather election is clearly taught as conditional upon faith.
What shall we say, then? That Gentiles who did not pursue righteousness have attained it, that is, a righteousness that is by faith; but that Israel who pursued a law that would lead to righteousness did not succeed in reaching that law. Why? Because they did not pursue it by faith, but as if it were based on works. They have stumbled over the stumbling stone, as it is written, "Behold, I am laying in Zion a stone of stumbling, and a rock of offense; and whoever believes in him will not be put to shame."
Romans 9:30-33
John 1:13, John 6:37, 44. 65, John 10-11-15, John 10:25-29, John 12 ,John 17:2, 9, II Thess. 2:13, Acts 13:48 can go on and on God's sovereign election from the scriptures
@@teemu1381
Yes all those verses prove that God sovereignly elects people based upon faith in him. Especially John 1:12-13, John 6:35-39, Notice in John 6:44 he will raise up the ones who come to him, John 10 speaks clearly that his sheep are those who believe in Christ, John 12:36!, 11 thess 2:13 clearly says chosen Through belief in the truth,
These verses literally prove that election is conditional on faith in Christ. Romans 9 does not teach unconditional election and no verse in scripture does. The Bible is clear whosoever will believe, whoever calls on his name, repentance is God's call for the sinner not him making people repent. God is clear he shows favoritism towards no man and he accepts all who will believe on Christ.
@From The Darkness To The Light
It's seems we would agree on most of what you said and election is important in scripture. Yet from scripture it clearly teaches that the invitation of salvation is open to all, but is conditional on faith in God. And yes this faith is not found within man or done by his fallen nature. Rather it comes from God who loves everyone and draws everyone unto himself. For John 16:8-9 says he (Spirit) will convict the world of sin, because they do not believe Christ. Yet faith is a command that must be carried out by a choice. For Romans could not be clearer.
But the righteousness based on faith says, "Do not say in your heart, 'Who will ascend into heaven?'" (that is, to bring Christ down) "or 'Who will descend into the abyss?'" (that is, to bring Christ up from the dead). But what does it say? "The word is near you, in your mouth and in your heart" (that is, the word of faith that we proclaim); because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.
Romans 10:6-9
Notice where these verses come from in the old testament.
"For this commandment that I command you today is not too hard for you, neither is it far off. It is not in heaven, that you should say, 'Who will ascend to heaven for us and bring it to us, that we may hear it and do it?' Neither is it beyond the sea, that you should say, 'Who will go over the sea for us and bring it to us, that we may hear it and do it?' But the word is very near you. It is in your mouth and in your heart, so that you can do it. "See, I have set before you today life and good, death and evil.
Deuteronomy 30:11-15
A sheep is not one of Christ's until they enter through the gate by belief in him. To say otherwise is a clear contradiction of Christ's clear words.
My sheep listen to my voice; I know them, and they follow me.
John 10:27
Furthermore Peter says we are not his people until we have faith in Christ.
Once you were not a people, but now you are God's people; once you had not received mercy, but now you have received mercy.
1 Peter 2:10
Those who follow Christ and continue in faith will never perish. They will be kept by God.
who by God's power are being guarded through faith for a salvation ready to be revealed in the last time.
1 Peter 1:5
I am the vine; you are the branches. Whoever abides in me and I in him, he it is that bears much fruit, for apart from me you can do nothing. If anyone does not abide in me he is thrown away like a branch and withers; and the branches are gathered, thrown into the fire, and burned.
John 15:5-6
The elect are those who have faith in God and continue in faith.
Paul, a servant of God and an apostle of Jesus Christ, for the sake of the faith of God's elect and their knowledge of the truth, which accords with godliness,
Titus 1:1
Therefore, brothers, be all the more diligent to confirm your calling and election, for if you practice these qualities you will never fall.
2 Peter 1:10
Note then the kindness and the severity of God: severity toward those who have fallen, but God's kindness to you, provided you continue in his kindness. Otherwise you too will be cut off.
Romans 11:22
The elect are chosen in Christ before the foundation of the world. Which according to scripture we are elect according to foreknowledge and this Union happens when one trusts in Christ.
And you also were included in Christ when you heard the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation. When you believed, you were marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit,
Ephesians 1:13
Do you believe you were born elect? Born saved? If you believe you were born saved than why do people need to get saved?
who saved us and called us to a holy calling, not because of our works but because of his own purpose and grace, which he gave us in Christ Jesus before the ages began,
2 Timothy 1:9
Here we see a verse on the foreknowledge of God.
@From The Darkness To The Light
Yes we must start with God and not man. That is why I reject man centered election and embrace Christ centered election. Election is not about humans, but about Christ. He is the precious chosen Cornerstone and we are built as stones upon him. In 1 Peter 2, we see that those who come to Christ are placed in Christ and built upon him. There is no election apart from entering a living relationship with the Elect one. There is no one who is righteous apart from an abiding relationship with the only one who is righteous. There is no one who is holy apart from abiding in the Holy One.
It seems your trying to espouse a view of random election, where God chooses a random group of people arbitrarily. Where eternity hinges on being lucky enough or being more loved than your neighbor.
Yet as for me and my house we choose to anchor our lives in Christ. Knowing that he will by no means cast away those who live in him through faith. The only election I have is through the grace and greatness of Christ who died for me. And only through this relationship will I ever be called elect.
@@calvinpeterson9581
You said Paul summed up Romans 9 starting and burst 30. Since when does a summary statement begin with a question. That defeats the whole purpose of the summary.
The summary is verse 25 and 26. That's a summary statement. The word call goes all the way back to chapter 8 when he talks about being called.
Nelson study Bible has excellent explanation on romans 9
Canon Press, are you deleting comments?
Don't think so? Are yours missing?
@@CanonPress There was a giant thread that is missing all of a sudden. Like 50 plus replies. Maybe the original commenter deleted it. Weird.
@@jtslev I'll check with other guys who have the password. It's not our gig to delete comments. Or shouldn't be at least
@@CanonPress It's either that or they may have been blocked which might delete their comments too.
And clearly, John 6 is wholly ignored
exagorástike ston Christó
John 6: 45 It is written in the prophets, And they shall be all taught of God. 👉🏻Every man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father, 👈🏻cometh unto me.
Sounds like they were responsible for learning from Gods teachings.
Jer 32: 33 And they have turned unto me the back, and not the face: though I taught them, rising up early and teaching them, yet they have not hearkened to receive instruction.
Of course they were. Calvin would agree with you on that too.
@@evanu6579 so you take one Verse of John 6 to prove a point?
Can you answer me who is the „they all“ in vers 45?
@@Christian.Portugues.Francisco
It’s Israel.
Calvinists use John 6:44 all the time and ignore the next verse. Those who came to Christ from Israel were those who already belonged to the Father......
John 17:6 ¶ I have manifested thy name unto the men which thou gavest me out of the world: 👉🏻thine they were, and thou gavest them me; 👈🏻and they have kept thy word.
They weren’t men that belonged to Satan or the world. These were the faithful remnant or those who repented at the preaching of John.
Mal 3:16 Then they that feared the LORD spake often one to another: and the LORD hearkened, and heard it, and a book of remembrance was written before him for them that feared the LORD, and that thought upon his name.
17 And they shall be mine, saith the LORD of hosts, in that day when I make up my jewels; and I will spare them, as a man spareth his own son that serveth him.
Those that feared Him were made into His jewels.
Mal 4:2 But unto you that fear my name shall the Sun of righteousness arise with healing in his wings; and ye shall go forth, and grow up as calves of the stall.
Jesus came to heal those that feared God. Those that rejected God were hardened so that they couldn’t believe.....
John 12:39 ¶ Therefore they could not believe, because that Esaias said again,
40 He hath blinded their eyes, and hardened their heart; that they should not see with their eyes, nor understand with their heart, and be converted, and I should heal them.
Math 21:31 Whether of them twain did the will of his father? They say unto him, The first. Jesus saith unto them, Verily I say unto you, That the publicans and the harlots go into the kingdom of God before you.
32 For John came unto you in the way of righteousness, and ye believed him not: but the publicans and the harlots believed him: and ye, when ye had seen it, repented not afterward, that ye might believe him.
Luk 7:29 ¶ And all the people that heard him, and the publicans, justified God, being baptized with the baptism of John.
30 But the Pharisees and lawyers rejected the counsel of God against themselves, being not baptized of him.
So John 6:45 has a lot more scripture to back it up. I could go on.
I think you have it wrong here; It is not Hosea but Malachi 1:2 "I have loved you, saith the LORD. Yet ye say, Wherein hast thou loved us? Was not Esau Jacob's brother? saith the LORD: yet I loved Jacob," this text speaks of Jacob and Esau first individually and then speaks of them nationally. Question: "was not Esau Jacobs brother?" Romans 9 is speaking of our salvation ,We need to understand that we are individually saved to belong to a corporate entity.
Gary Scalf
If Romans 9 is speaking of salvation, then does that mean that all that were chosen for the Seed are saved? ....
Rom 9:7 Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: 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.
King Jehoram was in the lineage of Jesus. Was he saved?
Lot and Job weren’t counted for the Seed. Were they damned?
@@evanu6579 Romans 9 is speaking of salvation; and vs 8 does indeed say "that they that are of the flesh (Israel) are not the children of God" and that is Paul"s point in Romans 9 is that you must be born again of the Spirit in to be saved. Even Israel in the Old Covenant was saved by faith and not by the birth of their flesh. Many kings and Israelites like King Jehoram were not saved, because they were not in the faith. You asked "Lot and Job weren’t counted for the Seed. Were they damned?" No, because they were of the faith. - I hope this helps clarify my statement. Blessings Evan
Gary Scalf
Were they born again in the old covenant?
The children of God I thought referred to the covenant He made with them. “I will be your God and you will be my people”. Not everyone who took that covenant was saved....
Lev 26: 11 And I will set my tabernacle among you: and my soul shall not abhor you.
12 And I will walk among you, and will be your God, and ye shall be my people.
Heb 3/ 8 Harden not your hearts, as in the provocation, in the day of temptation in the wilderness:
9 When your fathers tempted me, proved me, and saw my works forty years.
10 Wherefore I was grieved with that generation, and said, They do alway err in their heart; and they have not known my ways.
11 So I sware in my wrath, They shall not enter into my rest.)
It seems to me that it’s speaking about who Israel is. “Not all Israel is of Israel”. The promises had indeed come into effect through Christ. The question was, why Israel wasn’t receiving it for most of them had been hardened and haven’t taken hold.
Those OT citations were to be illustrations of the condition of Israel. It’s not about a blood line or keeping the law. It’s about faith. God will have mercy on whom He will have mercy and harden whom He will harden....
Rom 11: 7 ¶ What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded
8 (According as it is written, God hath given them the spirit of slumber, eyes that they should not see, and ears that they should not hear;) unto this day.
9 ¶ And David saith, Let their table be made a snare, and a trap, and a stumblingblock, and a recompence unto them:
10 Let their eyes be darkened, that they may not see, and bow down their back alway.
11 ¶ I say then, Have they stumbled that they should fall? God forbid: but rather through their fall salvation is come unto the Gentiles, for to provoke them to jealousy.
Pharaoh was simply used as an example....
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.
Israel was hardened for the same purpose as Pharaoh was. Israel is the two lumps of clay. The ones who received mercy were for honourable use and the ones who were hardened were for dishonourable use.
Do you see the parallels in chapter 9&11?
@@evanu6579 Yes, I do see the Parallels of 9-11 and I do agree with you, that Paul is speaking in these chapters of who is really Israel and it is saying, that not all Israel is Israel just because the are born of flesh. But I might differ with your opening thought that they were "born again" in the Old Covenant. I see the New Birth as only a New Covenant reality only. -Thank you Evan for your response
Gary Scalf
I agree with you as well. I was asking if you thought the new birth was in the old covenant. I see that you do not and we are in agreement.
Nice talking with you brother.
God bless.
Nothing can separate us from the love of God doesn't mean once saved always saved. If no power was able to stop Jesus' redemptive death and resurrection, no power has the ability to stop the gospel and the souls that will come to Jesus Christ.
J Daniels
It all comes down to exegesis vs eisegesis... plain and simple.
Chris Tan shouldn’t it come down to the will of god? Or do you hold you exegesis over him?
If a believer is walking in the Spirit why can't they trust their heart? God wouldn't give you a new heart that is wicked. I don't trust man made up doctrines like Calvinism that contradict scripture and distort the character of God.
The heart is naturally against God, no one seeks after God, no one does what is good. God does not need to make you evil, you already are.
@@ReeseGaillard True that the unbelievers heart is against but when a person believes and is born again they receive a new heart. Also, the bible is clear that God commands that men seek him and if they don't they are held accountable. It says that no one is without excuse -
Rom 1:20 - For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities--his eternal power and divine nature--have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.
No one seeks after God because " they have turned".
Are you talking about that gut feeling you get when you hear something that just doesn't seem quite right?
God gives us new hearts, but the heart isn't perfect.
That's why we start as babes needing milk, and we're capable of twisting doctrines. (2Peter 3:16)
@@timffoster True. We aren't fully perfected until we receive our new bodies.
Why is it that so many Calvinists think those who aren't are Armenians? Like there is no middle ground?
100% willing to come out the other end a Calvinist if that's what the text says. How good would eternal security be, knowing I wasn't selected for Dante's Inferno, but was drawn to repentance. Unfortunately even the great Doug Wilson can't defend Calvinism. Not from scripture anyway
Interviewer: “What are some good commentaries?”
Doug: “Calvin is good”
Me: 🤣
I went from Calvinist to something else. Not sure if I am Arminian. I might be somewhere in the middle. The Bible talks too much about free choices for me to be a Calvinist.
Most believers (all?) can look in hindsight and see how God was working in their life weeks, months, and I would side with 'years' before they ever decided to surrender. Calvinists make faith sound like 'a work'; but that doesn't make sense, since faith itself is a gift. The closest twenty-first century word/concept that I can think of that would make this clear is the word Épiphane. Could you imagine someone saying that they gave themselves an Épiphane 🙂
Similarly, 'faith' is not something that someone gives themselves. It is something that 'comes to you' after God has been working in your life for several years, determining the times and the places that you should live, watching the decisions that you make, sending (or not stopping them, depending on how you want to look at it) people to comfort you with both correct and incorrect words of wisdom, attempting to teach you discernment, and so on. Then when 'he' knows that you are ready he does this monergistic thing where He sends a particular person, coaxes you to listen to a particular message, or in my case has someone recommend a certain book to you (I over simplify my story).
"Calvinists make faith sound like 'a work'; but that doesn't make sense, since faith itself is a gift."
Run that by any Calvinist and he'll tell you the exact same thing; that faith itself is a gift; the entire package of salvation is a gift.
Lol! I know the Arminian that the person is talking about.
“If I speak in the tongues of men or of angels, but do not have love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal. If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have a faith that can move mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing.
Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs.
And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love.”
1 Corinthians 13:1-2, 4-5, 13 NIV
Read Ken Wilson's book "The Foundation of Augustinian-Calvinism", if you want to understand the origin of this man-made doctrine. Augustine was attempting to explain how infants could become the "elect" through water baptism. Since the child had not come to faith, it must be based on the will of another. It could have nothing to do with the will of the child.
Wut?
Ken Wilson is a joke dude
@@tjs.5044 That "joke" is an Orthopedic surgeon who read all of Augustine's works in the original languages for his Oxford dissertation.
How about you?
If you have to condemn others to make your doctrine work, you have revealed it for what it really is.
Or you could just read your Bible and decide for yourself.
@@SpotterVideo nah ken Wilson is a joke lol. Literally a dispensationalist. Imagine being that far removed from the Christian religion 😂
I really wish that Calvinists would stop calling ALL non-Calvinists Arminians. We're not, most of us aren't Arminians, Arminius was a Calvinist too, just a different kind of Calvinist. These are two different versions of Calvinism, and non-Calvinists are neither one.
Do you believe in particular atonement or potential atonement? Meaning, did Jesus actually redeem a specific people (His bride) for Himself or did He just make the way possible for everyone of all time? Or something else all together different?
I wish heterodox people would stop entering into a conversation about orthodox views on salvation and whine that their view isn't represented.
@@oracleoftroy Calvinism isn't "orthodox" but okay then.
@@toddcote4904 The Bible is pretty clear that salvation is available to anyone that will accept it. So, that's what I believe. I don't necessarily know that "for all time" makes sense in there, but yes, it's available for all people, whether or not they take God up on His offer is up to each individual though.
@@zzevonplant
Could you support "available" with 2 passages please?
So you hold to potential atonement not particular atonement.
I finished this video. And I'm like Arminian and believe people can fail salvation from this scripture I found Galatians 5:19-21 that when sinning that those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God. Galatians was Paul's teachings, proves it can fail eternal salvation. Grandpa believed he couldn't go to Hell, and Arminians believe he could.
Where did he get the knowledge that Paul was speaking about the nations when he spoke about Jacob and Esau? He was clearly speaking about individuals.
It´s a quote from Malachi 1:2-4
“I have loved you,” says the LORD. But you say, “How have You loved us?” “Was Esau not Jacob’s brother?” declares the LORD. “Yet I have loved Jacob; but I have hated Esau, and I have made his mountains a desolation and given his inheritance to the jackals of the wilderness.” Though Edom says, “We have been beaten down, but we will return and build up the ruins”; this is what the LORD of armies says: “They may build, but I will tear down; and people will call them the territory of wickedness, and the people with whom the LORD is indignant forever.”
@@thomasfryxelius5526 This passage in Malachi is a judgment against the seed of Esau.
Question: does this passage change the fact that God personally loved Jacob and personally hated Esau? No. It only reinforces the personal nature of it.
And Pharaoh also.
To an objective reader who is not intent in overturning Scripture, it is absolutely clear, personal, and about salvation.
The absolute clinching verse proving the individuality of Romans 9 is found in both verses 16, and verse 23 which speaks of Divine election to salvation that God did in eternity past before the world was made AND the personal nature of Romans 9.
@@Rbl7132 "To an objective reader who is not intent in overturning Scripture" Is this your view of yourself?
"does this passage change the fact that God personally loved Jacob and personally hated Esau?"
No biblical text say that He loves Jacob but hates Esau individually. The only text that uses this phrase (in Malachi) is expressly about nations, not individuals.
You mentioned v 16 and 23, and I think we should look at them both more carefully, since I think calvinists take them both out of context:
16 "So then, it does not depend on the person who wants it nor the one who runs, but on God who has mercy."
Calvinists will use this to say it does not depend on free will or choice. That´s not the context. He is speaking about Israel, and he says of them:
"Israel, pursuing a law of righteousness, did not arrive at that law." So it´s not up to their will or pursuit, it´s about faith. That´s the context, that´s what Paul is talking about.
23 "And He did so to make known the riches of His glory upon objects of mercy, which He prepared beforehand for glory"
Prepared beforehand is linked to the image of the potter, and in Jer 18 we see that the objects are groups of people and the preparing is how God prepares their future blessing or destruction. He applies this to gentile believers (who are blessed) and rebellious Israel (who are hardened in judgment)
If you read carefully through Rom 9, both individual and corprate examples are used, and if we are careful in distinguishing which are which, we can understand the passage.
It´s not an either/or.
@@thomasfryxelius5526 keep reading the verse!!!!!! ....v23 and 24..." and that he might make known The Riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had a four prepared unto glory, even us, whom he has called not only of the Jews only but also of the gentiles?"
Is not v 24 explicitly personal????
I wait your reply.
You said other things in your last message I must correct but I want your honest answer on verse 24 and how it fits into your view. Please explain. If it depends on man's wheel and choice, what does "called" mean?
So two questions, is this not personal? And also what does "called" mean to you ?
@@thomasfryxelius5526 Thomas. Do you believe salvation is dependant on man's will and that Christ loves all humanity the same in Christ?
And is this fair?
Romans 9 leads into Romans 10, "whoever calls upon the name of the Lord" means any Jew can leave Judaism and become Christian.
A jew doesn't need to leave Judaism to become a follower of Christ
As modern Judaism is, literally, an invention of post-temple Jews that rejected Christ as the Messiah, Judaism and christianity are mutually exclusive. One cannot worship a man as God and co-mingle and pray with the people who call His Holy Mother a whore and curse His name. Sure, one can celebrate their jewish roots as a Christian, but it is necessary to choose; one cannot have christianity and judaism, people who do such things make a chimera of both faith traditions.
@@bodysuit1134 Mary was a sinner just like us, but she was saved by the blood of Jesus Christ.
Also a Jew is a Jew by blood, so a jew who believes in Jesus is a Messianic Jew
@@darcie7773 that's the exact disconnect I'm talking about. A real "messianic" who understood Judaism in its original form wouldn't say such nonsense. How could the All-Holy God of Israel be born of a sinner? You do realize that high priests were occasionally dragged out of the Most Holy Place for having sinned therein, right?
Mary may have sinned at some hypothetical time in some hypothetical way, but we would be impious to try and guess on these things. What we do know is God is Holy and doesn't even hear the prayers of sinners. I understand this is the theology you were taught though, "all are sinners" seems so plain in scripture. I'd say you would be hard pressed to find sin in Enoch, Elijah, Joseph, and many others. Sin is entangling and it's easy to fall to it, but it is possible to overcome. God created human nature, the fall didn't completely mute the good, it just made passions and sins much easier.
I love Doug Wilson. I don't agree with him on this point. Salvation and God are so much deeper than the classic semi-augustinian view
Thanks for watching and interacting, Richard!
In terms of election, (which btw connotes a vote was taken) A child has no choice but to become a child to a parent. That seems to indicate like, calvinists do, we take no part in becoming a child of God. But then we reach an age of decision as adults or young adults. We then make a decision to love and honor our parents and family or to separate ourselves from the love of our parents. (In this example, assume good parents who only do and teach good things for their children) When a child has a real choice to leave their parents or follow the way of the world, then and only then is real-true love expressed in both directions. We see that God is loving and also just. That punishment for evil is Just and good but that mercy is better. Jesus said go find out what this means I desire mercy not sacrifice.
“Anyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but anyone who speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come.”
Matthew 12:32 NIV
“These words spake Jesus, and lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, Father, the hour is come; glorify thy Son, that thy Son also may glorify thee: as thou hast given him power over ALL flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast GIVEN him.”
John 17:1-2 KJV
“And the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient, in meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will GIVE them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth;”
2 Timothy 2:24-25 KJV
“No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day. And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were GIVEN unto him of my Father.”
John 6:44, 65 KJV
Man’s so-called “Free Will” is in bondage to sin and a slave. The fact of the matter , Man is Dead in trespasses and sin… man is incapable of coming to Christ and therefore if you are to be saved God must choose (Elect) and save us by Grace through Faith… and that faith is a gift of God! Just as repentance is a gift of God…
You may trust in your so-called free will and glory in your ability to come to Christ in and of your own “free will” but I will glory in God’s Free Grace and praise Him for all eternity for rescuing me from the slave market of sin!
To God be all the Glory!
Sola Deo Gloria
To say that God‘s sovereignty is “limited by man’s free-will” makes man sovereign over God… that is not only nonsense but out right heresy. You are following the teachings of the egotist Jack Hyles and his corrupt Arminian followers who blindly believe and accept his teachings rather than the clear teaching of scripture alone!
“But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.”
1 Corinthians 2:14 KJV
Romans 3 declares that there is NON that Seek after God. There are no seekers… that is why if there are to be saved people God must seek and save the lost!
“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.
But God, who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us, even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved;)”
Ephesians 2:1-5 KJV
Glorying in your so-called Free Will is complete and total heresy because your will is dead and incapable of coming to Christ or seeking God…
Oh, But God who is rich in mercy… I will glory in the grace and mercy of God and the finished work of the Lord Jesus Christ who died for my sins and saved me. Jesus is the author and finisher of my faith! Trusting in your “free-will” you may, but I will trust in God’s Free and abundant Grace. To who be the Glory forever, Amen 🙏
The title of the video is misleading.
You have a Calvinist talking about Romans 9, and you title the Video Arminians on Romans 9. This is a misdoing!
Its not misleading, its a segment called ask doug. So its Doug Wilson responding to the arminian error on Romans 9
“Don’t trust your heart” what do you mean by that?
“Read John Calvin...” So put your faith in what John Calvin only writes?
How about putting our faith and trust in the Spirit, whom Christ sends in his name to guide us.
He means what Proverbs means about your heart.
I think it is rather evident that he is stating that our hearts are deceitful above all things (Jer 17:9). The interviewer then asked who should one read to assist, and he stated Calvin. He nowhere states that one is to place their trust in Calvin. He is stating, as per his own words, that we are to approach the texts with an open mind. Read and study the texts, and see where the Lord guides you. This is after doing the hard work. And I mean that, the hard work. To dig deep into the Scriptures, reading those that came before us, and their thoughts, alongside the Holy Spirit to commit it as truth, or error.
Should I listen to your recommendation to ignore Calvin, Eric Bangerter, by that logic? Because you are not scripture.
If you want to marry into Calvin’s understanding that you call yourself by his name, then that’s your choice. I intend to pickup my cross and follow the one who died for us.
23 And He was saying to them all, “If anyone wishes to come after Me, he must deny himself, and take up his cross daily and follow Me. (Luke 9:23 NASB).
6 Jesus *said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me. (John 14:6 NASB).
43 I have come in My Father’s name, and you do not receive Me; if another comes in his own name, you will receive him. (John 5:43 NASB)
PREDESTINATED TO HELL: "And from the wicked their light is withholden, and the high arm shall be broken." (Job 38:15) ; "For thou hast hid their heart from understanding: therefore shalt thou not exalt them." (Job 17:4) ; "That the wicked is reserved to the day of destruction? they shall be brought forth to the day of wrath." (Job 21:30) ; "Jesus answered and said, Every plant, which my heavenly Father hath not planted, shall be rooted up." (Matthew 15:13) ; "In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil." (I John 3:10) ; "And now we call the proud happy; yea, they that work wickedness are set up; yea, they that tempt God are even delievered." (Malachi 3:15) ; "He hath also prepared for him the instruments of death; he ordaineth his arrows against the persecutors." (Psalm 7:13) ; "The Lord knoweth how to deliver the godly out of temptations, and to reserve the unjust unto the day of judgment to be punished." (II Peter 2:9) ; "For the LORD hath poured out upon you the spirit of deep sleep, and hath closed your eyes: the prophets and your rulers, the seers hath he covered." (Isaiah 29:10) ; "Because God hath deprived her of wisdom, neither hath he imparted to her understanding." (Job 39:17) ; "Look on every one that is proud, and bring him low; and tread down the wicked in their place. Hide them in the dust together; and bind their faces in secret." (Job 40:12-13) ; "In their heat I will make their feasts, and I will make them drunken, that they may rejoice, and sleep a perpetual sleep, and not wake, saith the LORD." (Jeremiah 51:39) ; "Thou turnest man to destruction; and sayest, Return, ye children of men." (Psalm 90:3) ; "They have not known nor understood: for he hath shut their eyes, that they cannot see; and their hearts, that they cannot understand." (Isaiah 44:18) ; "With him is strength and wisdom: the deceived and the deceiver are his. He leadeth counsellors away spoiled, and maketh the judges fools." (Job 12:16-17) ; "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." (Jude 4) ; "Reprobate silver shall men call them, because the LORD hath rejected them." (Jeremiah 6:30) ; "But these, as natural brute beasts, made to be taken and destroyed, speak evil of the things that they understand not; and shall utterly perish in their own corruption; And shall receive the reward of unrighteousness, as they that count it pleasure to riot in the day time. Spots they are and blemishes, sporting themselves with their own deceivings while they feast with you; Having eyes full of adultery, and that cannot cease from sin; beguiling unstable souls: an heart they have exercised with covetous practices; cursed children." (II Peter 2:12-14)
Election is God giving some, out of this world, a 'hearing' ear to hear Christ. God designed the Gospel for 'meek' ears (Is.61:1). And salvation, from sin and eternal death/damnation, is bestowed on those that 'the LORD taketh pleasure' in (Ps.149:4). God lives in eternity, His eternal now, and also in the praises of His people, which 'in meekness, receive the engrafted word, which is able (nay, more than able!) to save their souls' (Ja.1:21, 4:6,10).
And calvinist are supposed to be meek? Hajaha thats a good one 95% of calvinist are the most arrogant people I know (trust me I was a calvinist and a very arrogant at that)
@@DimensiondelosSecretos
What are you now?
@@michaelstanley4698 I'm not an arminian, nor a pelagian, semi pelagian, or provisionist. You can call me a biblicist... jaja just kidding, but really I'm still not sure, I like molinism, but not all of it, the same with the provisionists, but I'm still searching, but I'm not a calvinist, after so many years and thousands of people being mislead by my teachings, I'm finally awake to the lies
@@DimensiondelosSecretos
I've been called a calminian because I believe in both a general atonement/propitiation, AND a particular redemption.
Other than that, I base my beliefs on 'every word of God', that is, 'All Scripture'.
I think that you might like hearing two youtube channels, Landmark Baptists (I am koine), and Alan Clifford, a pastor/author in England.
Let me know what you think...
Most confusing answer ever.
Apparently, God is double minded according to Calvinist theology (2 Peter 3:9).
@Bogus Phone, I am not a Calvinist, But you did not understand 2Peter 3:9 (KJV), The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance. >>> NOTE: Paul was taliking to the Saved Elect, and ''to us-ward''... Paul means to us who are the Elect of God...
@@reynaldodavid2913Jo
Correct
Romans 9:30-32
"What shall we say, then? That Gentiles who did not pursue righteousness have attained it, that is, a righteousness that is by faith; but that Israel who pursued a law that would lead to righteousness, did not succeed in reaching that law." () "Why? Because they did not pursue it by faith, but as if it were based on works. They have stumbled over the stumbling stone."
Notice his answer is not "Because God hated them before they were born."
Romans 9:18 Therefore God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden....even if corporate election in view when Paul says Therefore he seems to be expanding his application from corporate to individuals as a whole. This was an excellent point by Mr. Wilson that I don't recall thinking of before.
I think the examples this is applied to show what Paul means:
In the example given, God chose to have mercy on Moses, who believed in God´s goodness, after Moses prayed to see God´s glory. So it´s not about an unconditional election but about God´s right to show favour to those that seek Him and believe in Him.
The other example given is that God hardens Pharao´s heart, a rebellious man being punished by God with hardness.
Paul uses this to argue that God is fully justified in giving grace to gentile believers and hardening the rebellious Israel:
"Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, attained righteousness, but the righteousness that is by faith; however, Israel, pursuing a law of righteousness, did not arrive at that law. Why? Because they did not pursue it by faith, but as though they could by works." So God has mercy on gentiles who seek Him by faith, and He hardens Israel that seek righteousness by the Law.
@@thomasfryxelius5526 no one seeks after God none is righteous. All have gone astray.
@@thomasfryxelius5526 the corporate election theory only goes so far as it seems quite clear Paul expands his application beyond that especially starting in 18 [g] 18 Therefore God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden.
19 One of you will say to me: “Then why does God still blame us? For who is able to resist his will?” 20 But who are you, a human being, to talk back to God? “Shall what is formed say to the one who formed it, ‘Why did you make me like this?’”[h] 21 Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for special purposes and some for common use?
@@thomasfryxelius5526 besides the fact that however you interpret the twins, they had done nothing Good or bad as they hadn't even been born.
@@thomasfryxelius5526 ask yourself this, if you could grant the possibility that romans 9 is calvinistic then what could you say against God? Could you say why did you form me this way? Does the Potter not have right over the clay? In other words If it is Calvinistic , could you say God is evil and Calvinists serve and evil God? That seems like a very risky proposition.
Arminian Bible study leaders be like: "Okay guys put on your blindfolds and open your Bibles to Romans chapter 9"
not cool bro
I laughed, I am still a cage stage Calvinist.
In an odd way, that is the most appropriate way to "open your Bibles" and try to interpret a passage. First, put on a blindfold and turn to the passage. Then, without reading anything (because you are still blindfolded) turn to the first chapter of the book and remove your blindfold. Arminians don't think that you should look at just what Romans 9 appears to be saying, because they believe that you shouldn't divorce it from its context like many Calvinists are wont to do. No Arminian (at least not an educated one on the subject) disagrees with the fact that election concerns individuals, they just don't believe that election is *primarily* individual; rather, Arminians hold the election is *primarily* corporate and *secondarily* individual, that is, you are not elect in virtue of God's decree that you personally will be saved, you are elect in virtue of being one with Jesus Christ, a member of the body, that is, The Church.
@@Real_LiamOBryan
So the "corporate" is not people/individuals?
I can just imagine going back in time and asking the Jewish priest who went into the holy of holies on the day of atonement and then sacrificed the animal and spread the blood all over was that for the whole world and every person on the planet?
Anyone who would think he says yes is in fantasy land.
Then asked the New Testament writers or Jesus himself one day was that thing you did on the cross like the day of atonement in the old days?
Anyone who thinks he would say no I think is in fantasy land.
@@billyr9162 *" So the "corporate" is not people/individuals?"*
Forgive me for saying so, but that is a really weird question since I addressed that specifically. Let me quote the relevant part.
"No Arminian (at least not an educated one on the subject) disagrees with the fact that election concerns individuals, they just don't believe that election is primarily individual; rather, Arminians hold the election is primarily corporate and secondarily individual, that is, you are not elect in virtue of God's decree that you personally will be saved, you are elect in virtue of being one with Jesus Christ, a member of the body, that is, The Church."*
This means that *individuals ARE elected*, they just are not elected individually. The election is, as I said, *PRIMARILY* corporate, even though it is still *SECONDARILY* individual.
So, again, how did I not already address your question?
As usual, another utterly uninspiring conversation where Calvin is mentioned more than Jesus.
Aren't you being a little uncharitable? Israel is mentioned 2-3 times more than Jesus is in the Bible. Systematic exegesis of a passage isn't a numbers game.
Hence, you have highlighted a great deficiency of “Systematic Exegesis”. If your flavor of exegesis finds Israel referenced more in scripture than Jesus, you prove my point.
@@denali9643 You don't have a point. It's not a numbers game. The bible says what it says and systematic exegesis is the best way to honor the meaning of the text.
rpavich You really do make my
point. Notice my original comment was that in this discourse, Calvin was mentioned more than Jesus. (A very common occurrence among Calvinists). Then you guys instinctively skipped over that fact and highlighted a ridiculous posture that Israel is mentioned more than Jesus in scripture - which is wildly incorrect. I hear Jesus’s own words right now, “You thoroughly search [systematically exegete] the scriptures which testify of me because you think in them you have eternal life...”.
How does the church of the first 1500 years interpret the text? What’s the general census?
There isn't one. It's all over the place, as it is now. It's a folly to think it can be solved that way. Jesus built/ builds His church according to His word alone. I would not put my trust in any particular man beyond those Apostles in the scripture, who wrote His words. Paul himself said to test him and not to go beyond the scriptures. This is why the reformers argued for sola scriptura.
I can see you replied, but I can't see what you said, sorry.
@@toddcote4904 I had to delete my last post as I misinterpreted you. But I can tell this from my reading of the first 1500 years (limited), they were not Calvinist nor monergist. If you read Romans 9-11 you can see the vessels of wrath became vessels of mercy. Those whom self willingly harden their hearts God also hardens. Israel who was cut off can also be grafted back in. Gentiles who have been grafted in can also be cut off if they do not continue in their faith (conditional). Take it for what it is though I’m no theologian, I try to read them all.
@@christhayer5034
I should clarify too. There is great value in reading the different "church leaders" but much care needs to used. However, I still stand by my post that at the end of the day we must look to what is in the scriptures. If you "see" what they "see", great. But if you/ we just latch on to our favorite teacher or preacher, we're bound to have error that we're blind to.
remember constatine who said that his kingdom was christian? god doesnt save nations, he saved people from every tribe, nation and people. he did choose israel as a nation to represent him to the world and they blew it big time as they hated his theocracy because their reprobate hearts wanted what the other reprobate nations enjoyed. sin. god had to keep chastening them and sometimes it was quite severe. reminds me of myself as i still believe the lie that sin is good and i run after it and god in his love and grace chastens me and gets me back in the fold. what a dumb sheep i can be at times thinking the grass on the other side of the river is better and off i go forgetting i cant swin.
Exactly, that is the world in John 3:16. God saves people in every tribe you've and nation. Same with the word all. All means the predestined elect fore-ordained foreknown adopted children of God throughout the world.
@@tstjohn777 amen and john17 should sum it up for good because we have the greatest prayer by the greatest prayer, jesus himself. no matter what anyother person believes when i go to the god-man and hear what he says then that settles it. however because god the holy spirit wrote through men the epistles they also tell the same truth.
Calvinism is not Biblical. Too much talking and not enough Bible.
Oh please. Don't slander brothers in Christ.
Whoa! If Calvin was not rooted in Scripture, I don’t know who is. May I suggest the Institutes for reading..
@@bezzforjoy no thanks, stick with the Bible and not the words and thoughts of men
@@BritishBibleBelievers So, if I don't follow the words and thoughts of men, does that mean I'm supposed to reject your words and thoughts about sticking to the Bible, or should I accept your words and thoughts and stick with the Bible? But then I would be following the words and thoughts of Calvin as well, who said "Scripture is superior to all human wisdom".
@@oracleoftroy You are told only the words of God are pure, not men and their own private views.
Completely wrong. Paul also says God chose them before they had done anything good or bad, in Romans 9. Was he saying before the nations? No. How do we know this? Because Paul says in the first few verses that “not all who are Israel are Israel.” No break between chapter 8 or 9. I love how arminians fail to actually exegete properly.
exagorástike ston Christó
Was Jacob chosen for salvation before doing anything good or evil or was he chosen to bring forth the Messiah (promises made to Abraham)?
I am not a Calvinist. I am also not an Arminianist. I am certain that Calvinism taken fully orbed is wrong. God clearly permitted man to be free within certain limitations. Time, Space, Gravity, Parents, etc. God draws, human's makes their choice. I personally think the issue is us trying to understand with human words and brains a being outside time and space. God can experience all of time and everything inside of it instantly and with full knowledge. All before there is such a thing as time. God clearly inserts events (by some means) into our experience with the objective to help us make better choices. Thus it can be true that God knows all things, and we can freely choose to respond freely to God's means. God can clearly force us to make choices, but instead entreats us to chose life. As for me and my household we will follow Christ our lord God and savior who first loved us so that we can love him. I join with Job and state "For I know that my Redeemer lives, and at the last he will stand upon the earth."
For the sake of argument, take Esau as referring to Edom and Jacob, Israel. Even then, don't you see God 'electing' one and 'bypassing' the other? He has also quoted the words from Romans. 8, who shall lay any charge against God's 'elect'? That shows again 'someone' is under the 'elect' category which obviously shows the 'rejection' of another party.
God has predestined the airplane to crash??? then to protect the passengers?? Hello sir, start reading your Bible... just don't listen to any hearsay from people like Norman Geisler....
What do you mean, when you said: Paul was wrestling with the whole section of Romans? Why would Paul wrestle for the things that God revealed to him.. He just accept it and preach it confidently without wrestling because Paul understand and believe that what God has revealed to him is true...
That’s a great point. In this video, They seem to be using mans wisdom to figure this all out. They then assume Paul was doing the same thing, wrestling with scripture. All scripture God breathed not Paul breathed
God saves only groups and not individuals?
Some people just have to contend with the fact that God hates them and there’s nothing they can do about it. Just accept it and try to live your life, he might not after all. Good luck.
Before creation, God's predestination was already in place, shaping the course of everything.
God already knows what the new heaven and the new earth will be like and what the condemned in the Lake of Fire will be subjected to.
Humans contribute nothing to their salvation; it is a 100% gift from God.
Predestination and free will are not a contradiction; they coexist.
The Calvinist chapters Really Doug let’s read the whole book and not stop at chapter 11
The Arminian god does not exist and if he doesn't exist,how can he save?
Want to understand Paul’s comment about the potter in Romans 9? Read Jeremiah 18 because that’s the scripture he is referring to, and it was God telling Israel if you rebel against me I can look elsewhere, which would be the gentiles. And that is what Romans 9 is about, it’s not about Calvinistic doctrine. It’s got nothing to do with God picking people for salvation and forcing them (or they say irresistible grace - it’s the same thing) to be saved. I wouldn’t say put the Bible away, I’d say take it out and lets go through the whole thing and you can see that the Calvin view of predestination and election is off.
People go to early church fathers as proof of the existence of Christ not Calvin or any other from 1500, but when it comes to the core beliefs of Calvin people ignore the fact that one thousand years before him, the church fathers pretty much taught free will across the board. That's something that needs to be addressed. I doubt God said, ok one thousand years is enough, now this ex catholic is going to teach my truth out of no where. Nah, I doubt it. All the while the gnostics are saying hey a fellow pre destination believer. Now, I believe Calvin was right with about 95 percent of his teaching just not tulip, sorry. I tend to believe the students of the apostles over an ex catholic from 1500 a.d.
If you read Ireneaus on free will, I think it becomes clear that he's preaching against the *fatalism* taught by gnostics. After all, he ends his chapter on free will by talking about predestination.
Can't have both predestination and free will unless you're talking about compatibilism.
(Note that Calvin, Edwards and RC Sproul insist man has free will: man is free to follow his will. But he's not able [or free] to *change* his will, now is he?)
Calvinism didn't come from Calvin. It came from The Bible. There a lot of church fathers. They all believe differently.
Most of my non-Calvinist brethren and peers really don't know why Paul quotes from Malachi regarding the twins. They think they know but they don't. Their idea that Paul decided to tell us that Jesus was born from Israel and not Edom -- right smack in the middle of explaining why national Israel missed righteousness by thinking it was by the law while individual Gentiles and a remnant of individual Jews attained unto righteousness by faith-- completely misses his entire point.
The truth is both obvious but obscure. Esau is Israel in type...the one who despises the birthright and gives it up. Esau was the firstborn as was Israel (ex 4 22). Jacob is Jesus in type...the one who "overcomes" and "supplants" the firstborn.....the "only begotten" to whom the seed was promised to in the first place.
Paul's entire point is that Israel missed righteousness as a nation because the Messiah would change everything; the Covenant and the promise while making it all about faith instead of nationality and ethnicity.
" But it is not that the word of God has taken no effect. For they are not all Israel who are of Israel, nor are they all children because they are the seed of Abraham; but, "In Isaac your seed shall be called." Rom 9:6-7 NKJV
Just like Ishmael and Isaac were the "two covenants"....so were Esau and Jacob. The two nations that were in Rebekah's womb, prophetically, were Israel and the Church.
"But you (the Church) are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a holy NATION His own special people, that you may proclaim the praises of Him who called you out of darkness into His marvelous light" 1Pe 2:9
"Therefore I say to you, the kingdom of God will be taken from you (Israel) and given to a NATION (The Church) bearing the fruits of it" Mat 21:43
"But I say, did Israel not know? First Moses says: "I will provoke you to jealousy by those who are not a nation, I will move you to anger by a foolish NATION" (the Church) Rom 10:19
It seems certain forms of Dispensationalism have created blinders over the minds of believers. Jesus took the place of Israel as the light to the Gentiles, the true vine, the only begotten Son-- and only those who believe in Him are saved. That is Paul's point not just in Romans but all of his letters.
Matthews 3:11
"I baptize you with water for repentance. But after me comes one who is more powerful than I, whose sandals I am not worthy to carry. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire.
Jesus elects when he
baptizes with the Holy Spirit
Denies salvation with the Baptism of fire
One he loves the other I hate
Why does he always hesitate when talks. Bugs me!
The Reformation is part of History. Calvin did not make a new doctrine but all he did is referring to the early church fathers like John Chrysostom, against the heresies of the Catholic church However I gladly give you some Bible text
Words like “predestined - predestinated - foreknowledge - elect - election - foreordained” appear with regularity and are always the basis for Pauline teaching on salvation. When someone denies personal predestination from before the foundation of the World” it shows that they have never really stood toe-to-toe with the Bible and read it for what it actually says. The staunchest brick wall opposition to deny the truth of God’s word is always built on traditions of men; never on the clear word of Scripture. Our fleshly, human ego just loves the idea that our “will” is totally at liberty. Yet, the Bible tells us that we are “dead in trespasses and sins.” Human tradition refuses to believe that. And Biblical salvation is always based on God’s free and sovereign grace, Only His will and His good pleasure; NEVER on our willingness first and God’s grace last. Again, human tradition refuses to believe that.
Exodus 33:19 And he said, “I will make all my goodness pass before you and will proclaim before you my name ‘The Lord.’ And I will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and will show mercy on whom I will show mercy.
Proverbs 16:4 The Lord has made everything for its purpose, even the wicked for the day of trouble.
Matthew 20:23 He said to them, “You will drink my cup, but to sit at my right hand and at my left is not mine to grant, but it is for those for whom it has been prepared by my Father.”
Matthew 22:14 For many are called, but few are chosen.”
Matthew 25:34 Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world.
Mark 13:20 And if the Lord had not cut short the days, no human being would be saved. But for the sake of the elect, whom he chose, he shortened the days.
John 6:37 All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never cast out.
Acts 13:48 And when the Gentiles heard this, they began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord, and as many as were appointed to eternal life believed.
John 6:44 No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day.
John 15:16 You did not choose me, but I chose you and appointed you that you should go and bear fruit and that your fruit should abide, so that whatever you ask the Father in my name, he may give it to you.
John 17:9 I am praying for them. I am not praying for the world but for those whom you have given me, for they are yours.
Romans 8:28-30 And we know that for those who love God all things work together for good, for those who are called according to his purpose. For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn among many brothers. And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified.
Romans 9:11 (for the children not yet being born, nor having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works but of Him who calls), 12 it was said to her, “The older shall serve the younger.” 13 As it is written, “Jacob I have loved, but Esau I have hated.”
14 What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? Certainly not! 15 For He says to Moses, “I will have mercy on whomever I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whomever I will have compassion.” 16 So then it is not of him who wills, nor of him who runs, but of God who shows mercy.
Romans 11:7 What then? Israel failed to obtain what it was seeking. The elect obtained it, but the rest were hardened,
2 Timothy 1:9 Who saved us and called us to a holy calling, not because of our works but because of his own purpose and grace, which he gave us in Christ Jesus before the ages began,
Ephesians 1:3-5 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ, 4 just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before Him in love, 5 having predestined us to adoption as sons by Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the good pleasure of His will.
Ephesians 1:11-12 In him we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to the purpose of him who works all things according to the counsel of his will, so that we who were the first to hope in Christ might be to the praise of his glory.
1 Peter 1:2 According to the foreknowledge of God the Father, in the sanctification of the Spirit, for obedience to Jesus Christ and for sprinkling with his blood: May grace and peace be multiplied to you.
1 Peter 1:20 He was foreknown before the foundation of the world but was made manifest in the last times for the sake of you
Galatians 1:15 But when he who had set me apart before I was born, and who called me by his grace,
1 Thessalonians 1:4 For we know, brothers loved by God, that he has chosen you,
Revelation 13:8 And all who dwell on earth will worship it, ( So they worshiped the dragon who gave authority to the beast) everyone whose name has not been written before the foundation of the world in the book of life of the Lamb who was slain.
Revelation 20:1 Then I saw an angel coming down from heaven, having the key to the bottomless pit and a great chain in his hand. 2 He laid hold of the dragon, that serpent of old, who is the Devil and Satan, and bound him for a thousand years; 3 and he cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal on him, so that he should deceive the nations no more.
Revelation 20:7 Now when the thousand years have expired, Satan WILL BE released from his prison 8 and will go out to deceive the nations which are in the four corners of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle, whose number is as the sand of the sea. “WILL BE” means it will happen BECAUSE of God’s Decree.
Why now release Satan to deceive the nations? This lifetime is short and Hell is forever. Would you rather be presumptuous and not find out the truth. Never Lost is Never Saved.
How much FREE-WILL do people in Thailand have with 93% practicing Buddhist and 5.5% Islam 1.5% divided in no religion and Christians? To be born & raised a Buddhist only a miracle from our Sovereign Lord can change the heart of a person. If God wanted all to be saved all would be saved. The old covenant was for Israel only. The new covenant does not have limitation to certain people.
Your title is deceiving.
What about MLJ?
Dear sir, your idea of corporate election is right in one way and false in another. Let me explain.
In Jeremiah we read again and again that whole Israel will be condemned and in the same chapters we read that whole Israel will be saved.
So we question ourselves if this is speaking of the same time or same nation, because one cannot be condemned and saved at the same time.
If we compare Scripture with Scripture we can see the answer to our question.
All men need to be reborn by the Holy Spirit. And there is neither Jew nor Greek, but we are all equal.
If we put this together with the prophecies of Jeremiah and put it next to Romans, then we readily read the following:
All Israel of the flesh will be condemned and all Israel of the regeneration will be saved. Because there is neither Jew nor Greek and all man and woman need to be reborn.
Only in this way you connect all of Scripture together in the right way.
Be blessed
I LOVE Doug Wilson, but I gotta say. Some people have survived plane crashes, for example, when God said to destroy all of cannan, not every single human perish, God forgave some and allowed others to join israel. I think he has the meaning of romans 9 on it's head. God loved Jacob but not all of jacob was saved just like paul says at the beggining of the chapter. And he hated esau but I'm sure not all of esau was condemmed just like not all of cannan was condemmed.
So when we say God has his elect, I can't see it as an individual election, rather I see it as a class action election, where God chooses to elect ALL WHO BELIEVE, so that way it can be corporate and individual at the same time without God having to predestined people to be saved and others to be dammed before time began for no apparent reason other then to display his power and glory...
So when the plane crashes (judgement comes) only those who survive the crash (the corporate elect of God I.E those who believe) will be saved.
I believe both Calvin and Arminius got it just slightly wrong because both believed salvation is a direct result of faith - whether by unconditional election or conditional. I believe, according to scripture, salvation is obtained indirectly. A binary choice of faith qualifies/disqualifies us as heirs of Abraham whereby we then INHERIT salvation.
Those heirs are the elect referred to.
Salvation obtained indirectly? Indirect children of God?
Calvin would not say faith is meritorious, but that the elect will be brought to faith.
bob polo Accepting the gospel makes you an heir.. heirs inherit salvation.
Calvin would say God grants his chosen grace for faith, whereby they obtain salvation. Arminius would say a person chooses faith, whereby obtaining salvation.
I would say a person chooses faith, whereby obtaining heirship. And btw, heirs inherit salvation.
Calvin:
Faith = Salvation
Arminius:
Faith = Salvation
Bible:
Faith = Heirship
Heirs = Salvation
@@JakeGuptill Calvin would not say faith = salvation. Christ merited salvation, and the manner in which his elect are united to him and obtain all that He has merited is by the spirit uniting them to him in faith/ union with Christ by/in the Spirit.
From the godward perspective, the elect are chosen, regenerated, brought to faith/repentance, persevere to the end- none of which is meritorious and are carried out by the Triune God in his people.
Christian 78 Wouldn’t that be the work of irresistible grace? That one eventually comes to a “saving faith.” Calvin still believed faith = salvation, he just believed God did all the work and and all the choosing.
Doug comes very close to the truth except that he does not address the main difference between corporate election and Calvinism.
*How* does someone become part of the elect?
The bible teaches us that we become one of the elect through faith in Jesus Christ. (Eph 1:4, we are elect in Christ. We are in Christ only upon putting our faith in him)
The Calvinistic view assumes that the elect are individually chosen before the foundation of the earth.
Paul say's All Israel is not Israel.. what is the difference, how does one know the true Israel? The answer is in Romans 9:31-
31 but Israel, following after a law of righteousness, didn’t arrive at the law of righteousness.
32 Why? Because they didn’t seek it by faith, but as it were by works of the law. They stumbled over the stumbling stone;
So Paul's points out that the failure of Israelites to accept Jesus by faith is why they have fallen away.
He also points to a judgement of hardening because of their unbelief.. So most of Israel is like the pharaoh in that they have been hardened.
Nothing in the text points to unconditional election or irresistible grace (in that God chooses who will have saving faith). This has to be read into the text.
You are ignoring the meaning of the word "elect." "Elect" means "selected" or "chosen." No one can make himself elect. Neither Joe Biden nor Donald Trump can make himself elect in November. Election is something that happens to you; it is not a reflexive verb. You don't self-elect.
God is unchanging. The Bible is very clear about that. Thus, God has had a saving love relationship with his elect eternally. He doesn't start loving he elect in a saving way in response to their faith. That would be a change in God's perfect eternal state. "Those whom he foreknew he also predestined ..." means that those individuals that he had eternally intended to save he did save. Chosen, called, justified, glorified -- all the work of God. "He" [God] is the subject of the sentence; he is the actor, the doer.
@@BatMite19
Election means to be chosen. There is no need for the choice to be unconditional or without reason. God elects based on faith in Jesus. Whoever will believe in Jesus is elect.
Election need not mean the choice of individuals in an unconditional manner.
As to God being unchanging, how do you reconcile that with God's interaction with his creatures in "time"?
If God is unchanging in terms of his relationship with creation, then the incarnation and crucification changed nothing because it has already happened in God's mind from the beginning of creation. These kind of speculations should not have more weight than the word of God.
@@Ashwin2584 I don't want this to devolve into a 2 Timothy 2:23 kind of thing, so I will simply say that you appear (emphasis on "appear") to me to be reducing God to the level of a superhuman -- super, but still human. You seem to be limiting God to things that limit man. Certainly no Calvinist, including Calvin himself, would claim to understand how God's omniscience and providence work together. But we do know that God uses anthropomorphic language when describing his providential activities. Somehow God, who exists outside of time (as the Creator of time itself) is able to act within the constraints of time. Somehow Jesus, who is the eternally existent God, became a Man and lived within the constraints of mortality. Even when God appears to "change his mind (Exodus 32:14), Malachi 3:6 and Numbers 23:19 are still true.
@@BatMite19
Precisely.. there is a mystery involved in how God's omniscience, his existence apart from time and his actions in time interact.
I am not limiting God in any way. I am also not speculating on how God's unchanging nature limits him. I have always understood God's unchanging nature as referring to the fact that his nature (charector,power, knowledge etc) is unchanging.
However, extending God's unchanging nature to our relationship with him is unbiblical. The bible clearly teaches us that our relationship with God changed at the point of time that we believed in Jesus. We were enemies of God before this time, and then we were reconciled to Christ when we believed in him. This is the clear biblical doctrine of Justification by faith. It happens at a point in time. It involves a real change in our status/relationship with God.
These are the biblical facts. Why should I ignore what is explicitly taught in the bible for the sake of resolving a mystery?
Don't you believe in Sola Fide? If you do, then you must believe that faith Jesus changed how God views/viewed you. If there is a contradiction w.r.t God's unchanging nature, then it must be because of one of two reasons:
a) You are applying God's unchanging nature to things it doesn't apply to.
b) There is a mystery involved.
I lean towards explanation "a" w.r.t your query.
@@Ashwin2584 Or how about c) God is unchanging. This is an unqualified statement, and thus comprehensive. Therefore, any time that God appears to change, we must understand this as anthropomorphic language. I guess we'll know for sure in heaven. Till then, we study on!
So sad, every saved person know intuitively these calvinistic doctrines are wrong, the Holy Spirit inside them begs them to reject it, the scripture NEVER says it, but, in there seminaries, and by pressure from the other townspeople that don't want to be the person to say out loud " hey. The emperor has no clothes" NO ONE, NO ONE becomea a calvinist by reading scripture un context, they become a calvinist after pressure for others, and then absolutely convincing themselves this horrible doctrine is true. It was NO where in thi first 400 years of the church, not until Augustine brought in his Manicean gnosticism with his dispute with Palagius did it enter the church, and read about it, he forced it in. Open your eyes church, it is NOT what calvinist say: How does a sovereign Gid show His love, it is how does a Loving God choose to show His sovereignty!!!
God decrees the plane will crash. Individuals decide if they will board the plane.
There is so much error in Dougs statements. If i may, concerning Romans 9 it is extremally evident that Pauls advances is Israel. The Promise and agreements are for Israel. 2nd he said that Paul was referring to Hosea in Roamans 9:13 that is not true. Paul is precepting Malachi 1:2-4. Where GOD is saying that he hates Edom. Additionally Roamans 7:1 says that he is speaking to those who the law was given. Therefore according to Psalms 147:19-20 the law was given to Israel,
Doug’s exegesis here (the idea that Romans 9 is speaking about nations and not individuals) does not work, and it’s a rare view to hold in Calvinist circles. Id like Doug to debate James White on this issue. In Romans 9 we are introduced to true Israel, and we realize that the “nation” of Israel was only a means to an end. Not every member of the nation of Israel was saved, therefore God’s salvific love was only shown to true Israel and not the nation as a whole. Because we are dealing with soteriology in Romans 9, the understanding that God loved the man Jacob, and hated the man Esau is more consistent. Also, remember that the Apostle’s interpretation sets the standard for OT texts. An OT text might look one way to us, but we must trust the Apostle’s interpretation of a text when its given explicitly.
wow so this video is the video that pushed me over the edge. i repent from calvinsm
this is why i dont buy into arminianism. this is so much more bloated and needed much more reading into the verse.