Another Calvinistic Error

[Winman]

Skandelon

I believe God does harden some people's hearts and blinds their minds, and the scriptures do say that it is to bring about God's purpose. In the case of Pharaoh, it was so he could demonstrate his power, and that his name would be declared through the earth.

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.

But this is not saying God was willing Pharaoh should perish. God is not willing any should perish and all should come to repentance. But in God's foreknowledge, he knows who will believe and who will not. God gives every man an opportunity to repent. But at some point at which only God knows, he will allow a man to be deceived and hardened. And this is what Romans 9 says about Pharoah. He was a vessel "fitted for destruction". That word "fitted" is very important, it shows that Pharaoh brought about his own destruction, it was not God who made him rebellious and disobedient. He was very longsuffering toward Pharaoh and gave him many chances to repent.

Exo 10:3 And Moses and Aaron came in unto Pharaoh, and said unto him, Thus saith the LORD God of the Hebrews, How long wilt thou refuse to humble thyself before me? let my people go, that they may serve me.

God wasn't making Pharaoh proud, Pharaoh of his own free will refused to humble himself.

The scriptures do say God hardened Pharaoh's heart, but they also many times say Pharaoh hardened his own heart.

Exo 8:15 But when Pharaoh saw that there was respite, he hardened his heart, and hearkened not unto them; as the LORD had said.

God knew from the very beginning that Pharaoh would never listen.

Exo 3:19 And I am sure that the king of Egypt will not let you go, no, not by a mighty hand.

So, it is not so much that God made Pharaoh hard. God already knew Pharaoh was an extremely proud and stubborn person who would not listen. God knew that each time he confronted Pharaoh he would become more obstinate. So this is what made Pharaoh fit for destruction and wrath.

Rom 9:22 What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction:

So, the word "fitted" is very important here. God did not determine that Pharaoh would be rebellious and obstinate from the beginning of time. But he did see in his foreknowledge that Pharaoh would have these qualities, and so raised him up to a position of power that he could demonstrate his power and make his name known to the world.

 

[Skandelon]

Skanelon

I believe God does harden some people's hearts and blinds their minds, and the scriptures do say that it is to bring about God's purpose. In the case of Pharaoh, it was so he could demonstrate his power, and that his name would be declared through the earth.

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.

But this is not saying God was willing Pharaoh should perish. God is not willing any should perish and all should come to repentance.

I agree. Pharaoh's hardening is not really about his salvation, but about his willingness to submit to God and let the Israelite people go.

But in God's foreknowledge, he knows who will believe and who will not. God gives every man an opportunity to repent. But at some point at which only God knows, he will allow a man to be deceived and hardened. And this is what Romans 9 says about Pharoah. He was a vessel "fitted for destruction". That word "fitted" is very important, it shows that Pharaoh brought about his own destruction, it was not God who made him rebellious and disobedient. He was very long suffering to Pharaoh and gave him many chances to repent.

Agreed. But I would add that there were times during all the plagues that God actively hardened Pharaoh's heart so as to blind him from the obvious truth that the plagues revealed. He blinded him so as to accomplish a greater purpose. He didn't have to violate Pharaoh's will by making him rebellious, that would be sinful and against God's nature. God only hid the truth from him so that he would remain in his already rebellious state. A state that Pharaoh freely chose to be in, not one God put him in.

I think we agree for the most part. The only difference we might have is that I have no problem saying that God actively and purposefully intervened to blind Pharaoh at times during this process. Is that just of God to do? Well, that is exactly the question Paul answers for us in Roman's 9.

 

[Winman]

I think we agree for the most part. The only difference we might have is that I have no problem saying that God actively and purposefully intervened to blind Pharaoh at times during this process. Is that just of God to do? Well, that is exactly the question Paul answers for us in Roman's 9.

Yes. this is the difficult question. If God is not willing any should perish, then why would he harden or blind someone that might be saved?

But the scriptures seem to show that God draws a line in the sand. He is very patient and longsuffering toward every person. But at some point only he knows, a man crosses the line. At that point God gives a man up and allows him to be deceived or hardened.

Gen 6:3 And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.

Rev 2:20 Notwithstanding I have a few things against thee, because thou sufferest that woman Jezebel, which calleth herself a prophetess, to teach and to seduce my servants to commit fornication, and to eat things sacrificed unto idols.
21 And I gave her space to repent of her fornication; and she repented not.

We see with Jezebel that God gave her space or time to repent. But she would not. So, at some point a man can cross the line with God.

 

[Allan]

Both camps limit the atonement unless one believes in universal atonement which is outside of the Calvinist/Arminian argument.

This is not really accurate.
Both camps limit 'redemption' not atonement. It is for this reason you have general atonement and limited atonement, yet both groups affirm limited or specific redemption. Here is somethign I posted a while back when this was stated as well:

The Atonement itself is not limited since it must have been done in accordance with Law for ALL. (ie. The illistrative picture of the Atonement was that it was made for ALL of Israel but not all of Israel was saved)
However the propitiatory merit of the atonement is limited to those who by faith recieve it. (Rom 3:25)

The scope of General atonement is toward all men, and therefore there is no limiting of the atonement that was made.

Since the atonement is applied through faith (Rom 3:25) and not prior to it, even those who will be believers, with respect to the atonement, it has done nothing toward nor for them as of yet. Though it was made for them the very provision it gives has not been yet applied and will only be so by faith.

Therefore the benifit of the atonement, which is redemption, is limited.

So in short;
The atonement is not limited in it's scope, but the redemption it provides through faith is.[/QUOTE]

 

[Skandelon]

Yes. this is the difficult question. If God is not willing any should perish, then why would he harden or blind someone that might be saved?

Actually, the act of hardening them can be merciful. In the case of the Jews, for example, Paul explains that their being hardened allowed for the in grafting of the Gentiles, which in turn would provoke the Jews to envy and might lead some of them to be saved. Read Romans 11:14. Paul ends that part of the discourse by saying that God has bound all men over to disobedience so that he might show them all mercy. In other words, its in that hardened state that some will break and they will give up and come to faith...

 

[Winman]

This is not really accurate.
Both camps limit 'redemption' not atonement. It is for this reason you have general atonement and limited atonement, yet both groups affirm limited or specific redemption. Here is somethign I posted a while back when this was stated as well:

The Atonement itself is not limited since it must have been done in accordance with Law for ALL. (ie. The illistrative picture of the Atonement was that it was made for ALL of Israel but not all of Israel was saved)
However the propitiatory merit of the atonement is limited to those who by faith recieve it. (Rom 3:25)

The scope of General atonement is toward all men, and therefore there is no limiting of the atonement that was made.

Since the atonement is applied through faith (Rom 3:25) and not prior to it, even those who will be believers, with respect to the atonement, it has done nothing toward nor for them as of yet. Though it was made for them the very provision it gives has not been yet applied and will only be so by faith.

Therefore the benifit of the atonement, which is redemption, is limited.

So in short;
The atonement is not limited in it's scope, but the redemption it provides through faith is.

Allan, did you post this response here by accident? I know you are discussing the atonement on another thread.

By the way, I agree with you, Christ's blood atoned for all men.

2 Pet 2:1 But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction.

These men are lost heretics, yet the scriptures show Jesus's blood atonement bought them just as it does the saved.

 

[Allan]

Allan, did you post this response here by accident? I know you are discussing the atonement on another thread.

By the way, I agree with you, Christ's blood atoned for all men.

2 Pet 2:1 But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction.

These men are lost heretics, yet the scriptures show Jesus's blook atonement bought them just as it does the saved.

No, I was responding to Ann's post that both groups limit the Atonement when in fact they do not. Both groups limit redemption (who is redeemed) not the Atonement.

 

[Skandelon]

No, I was responding to Ann's post that both groups limit the Atonement when in fact they do not. Both groups limit redemption (who is redeemed) not the Atonement.

Thanks for the explanation of that Allan. I hadn't thought of it that way before. I've always just seen it as the application of the atonement being limited in both groups and thus not really worth discussing in that much detail when there is so much other error to deal with.