Concerning Romans 9:16

[canadyjd]

I have made the following statement….

… If God responds to something mankind does and then makes them “elect”, that is a works based salvation.

… If mankind responds to what God has done through the power of God Holy Spirit after election, that demonstrates grace…

There are numerous passages that support these statements. However, I would like to focus on Romans 9:16.

The question that the Apostle Paul is answering is who are Abraham’s descendants that will inherit the promises of God.

Paul goes into a lengthy discussion of how it is not “children if the flesh” that are descendants, but “children of the promise” that is … those that believe/have faith in God’s promises as opposed to direct physical descendants.

He further explains how God, as a potter, molds individuals for specific purposes… some for honorable use and some for common use.

And then Paul states in Romans 9:16, it doesn’t depend on he who runs, or he who wills, but in God who has mercy.

This lays the foundation of “First Cause”. That is, it is God who acts first in showing mercy. Man’s “will” (to believe) does not come first. Man’s willingness to “run” (work) does not come first.

God acts first in showing mercy. There are many passages that support this view and strengthen it, but I’d like to focus on just this one for discussion.

Welcome to all who wish a civil discussion.

peace to you

 

[JonC]

There is a third (and more common) choice.

I am not advocating or rejecting this option, just adding it to the thread.

That is God draws men to Himself but men are not numbered among the elect until they believe. The positive result (salvation) is God's work. The negative (lost) is man's work.

One could argue that man's ability to reject God equates to a work based salvation because refraining from this work results in salvation (is a work itself), but that is a philosophical argument which is not logical.

Again, not taking sides - just noting it is not a two option issue.

 

[canadyjd]

There is a third (and more common) choice.

I am not advocating or rejecting this option, just adding it to the thread.

That is God draws men to Himself but men are not numbered among the elect until they believe. The positive result (salvation) is God's work. The negative (lost) is man's work.

One could argue that man's ability to reject God equates to a work based salvation because refraining from this work results in salvation (is a work itself), but that is a philosophical argument which is not logical.

Again, not taking sides - just noting it is not a two option issue.

I appreciate the comment. This third, more common? choice is not supported by the text.

It is clear from Romans 9:16 that God is the “First Cause” in election. Not the man who wills. Not the man who runs. But God, who has mercy.

peace to you

 

[JonC]

I appreciate the comment. This third, more common? choice is not supported by the text.

It is clear from Romans 9:16 that God is the “First Cause” in election. Not the man who wills. Not the man who runs. But God, who has mercy.

peace to you

I disagree that the third option does not support the text.

The reason I disagree is that the third position depends entirely on God's mercy for salvation. Human merit is not a factor. Man's work (to gain salvation or save himself) only results in damnation. Man can only be saved by the grace of God.

 

[37818]

I have made the following statement….

… If God responds to something mankind does and then makes them “elect”, that is a works based salvation.

… If mankind responds to what God has done through the power of God Holy Spirit after election, that demonstrates grace…

There are numerous passages that support these statements. However, I would like to focus on Romans 9:16.

The question that the Apostle Paul is answering is who are Abraham’s descendants that will inherit the promises of God.

Paul goes into a lengthy discussion of how it is not “children if the flesh” that are descendants, but “children of the promise” that is … those that believe/have faith in God’s promises as opposed to direct physical descendants.

He further explains how God, as a potter, molds individuals for specific purposes… some for honorable use and some for common use.

And then Paul states in Romans 9:16, it doesn’t depend on he who runs, or he who wills, but in God who has mercy.

This lays the foundation of “First Cause”. That is, it is God who acts first in showing mercy. Man’s “will” (to believe) does not come first. Man’s willingness to “run” (work) does not come first.

God acts first in showing mercy. There are many passages that support this view and strengthen it, but I’d like to focus on just this one for discussion.

Welcome to all who wish a civil discussion.

peace to you

So do you suppose not to call God a liar requires 1 John 5:9-13 to be works based salvation? Even though in not making God a lair by it does not negate Romans 9:15-16?

 

[canadyjd]

I disagree that the third option does not support the text.

The reason I disagree is that the third position depends entirely on God's mercy for salvation. Human merit is not a factor. Man's work (to gain salvation or save himself) only results in damnation. Man can only be saved by the grace of God.

Again, the text supports the doctrine of “First Cause”. God acts first, according to the text, when it comes to election.

Please explain from the text why the doctrine of “First Cause” is not supported.

peace to you

 

[canadyjd]

So do you suppose not to call God a liar requires 1 John 5:9-13 to be works based salvation? Even though in not making God a lair by it does not negate Romans 9:15-16?

I want to focus on Romans 9:16 and the doctrine of “First Cause” concerning election.

Reconciling other passages will distract from addressing Roman 9:16.

There is nothing in 1 John 5: 9-13 that addresses election.

peace to you

 

[Silverhair]

Again, the text supports the doctrine of “First Cause”. God acts first, according to the text, when it comes to election.

Please explain from the text why the doctrine of “First Cause” is not supported.

peace to you

God’s mercy is not given to us because of what we wish to do, or because of what we actually do, but out of His desire to show mercy.

But that just leads to a question that the verse does not answer. Why does God show mercy? It also does not support your view of God being first cause that is unless you think God is just being arbitrary in His choice of whom to show mercy?

 

[JonC]

Again, the text supports the doctrine of “First Cause”. God acts first, according to the text, when it comes to election.

Please explain from the text why the doctrine of “First Cause” is not supported.

peace to you

I never disagreed with God being the first cause.

I merely pointed out that the OP resented two choices when there are more.

Then I offered a third view - That is God draws men to Himself but men are not numbered among the elect until they believe. The positive result (salvation) is God's work. The negative (lost) is man's work.

In this view God is the first cause. But the order is different than presented in the OP regarding election.

You incorrectly said that that view is not supported by the text of Romans 9:16. I pointed out you were mistaken on that assessment.


Here is the verse:

Romans 9:16 So then it does not depend on the man who wills or the man who runs, but on God who has mercy.

Here is that third option you posted did not support the text (I think you meant that the other way around):

God draws men to Himself but men are not numbered among the elect until they believe. The positive result (salvation) is God's work. The negative (lost) is man's work.


God drawing man would be God as that first cause. In fact, God could draw all men yet many not be saved and He would still be the first cause of those who are saved.


That third option is the Classic Armeanian position (I am not an Arminian but thought we should at least include the position given its prominence).

 

[canadyjd]

I never disagreed with God being the first cause.

I merely pointed out that the OP resented two choices when there are more.

Then I offered a third view - That is God draws men to Himself but men are not numbered among the elect until they believe. The positive result (salvation) is God's work. The negative (lost) is man's work.

In this view God is the first cause. But the order is different than presented in the OP regarding election.

You incorrectly said that that view is not supported by the text of Romans 9:16. I pointed out you were mistaken on that assessment.

Here is the verse:

Romans 9:16 So then it does not depend on the man who wills or the man who runs, but on God who has mercy.

Here is that third option you posted did not support the text (I think you meant that the other way around):

God draws men to Himself but men are not numbered among the elect until they believe. The positive result (salvation) is God's work. The negative (lost) is man's work.

God drawing man would be God as that first cause. In fact, God could draw all men yet many not be saved and He would still be the first cause of those who are saved.

That third option is the Classic Armeanian position (I am not an Arminian but thought we should at least include the position given its prominence).

The text says nothing of God “drawing” men unto Himself and making them elect when they believe. That is why I stated your third option is not supported by the text.

The text presents God as molding individuals from clay, each for specific purpose. Some are created by God for honorable use. Others are not.

He does this so that His purposes will stand. “Why does He find fault? (Paul’s questioner asked) “Who can resist His will?”

In summary, you have failed to show from the text this “third” option is supported. It clearly is not. This “third” option is based on pure speculation with no textual support from Romans 9.

Thanks for the comments

peace to you

 

[canadyjd]

…
But that just leads to a question that the verse does not answer. Why does God show mercy? It also does not support your view of God being first cause that is unless you think God is just being arbitrary in His choice of whom to show mercy?

The passage does answer your question. “So His purposes” will stand.

God is not arbitrary in His will. He has specific purpose for every individual He elects and then brings into a right relationship with Himself through the power of God Holy Spirit.

peace to you

 

[JonC]

The text says nothing of God “drawing” men unto Himself and making them elect when they believe. That is why I stated your third option is not supported by the text.

The text presents God as molding individuals from clay, each for specific purpose. Some are created by God for honorable use. Others are not.

He does this so that His purposes will stand. “Why does He find fault? (Paul’s questioner asked) “Who can resist His will?”

In summary, you have failed to show from the text this “third” option is supported. It clearly is not. This “third” option is based on pure speculation with no textual support from Romans 9.

Thanks for the comments

peace to you

The text does not say a lot. It dies not, for example, define the "it" that doesn't depend on man.

You are making a huge mistake by trying to build a doctrine with one verse at the exclusion of passages.


But to explain - Christians who accept Scripture as true believe that God draws men to Himself.

God is the "first cause" of salvation. And salvation is by grace.

You get to your verse which states that "it" is not a result of Man but the grace of God. But your solution is not the only one that is supported by that verse.

You may not like that you have not stumbled upon a view that alone is supported by Romans 9:16, but facts do not care about feelings.

 

[canadyjd]

The text does not say a lot. It dies not, for example, define the "it" that doesn't depend on man…..

….You may not like that you have not stumbled upon a view that alone is supported by Romans 9:16, but facts do not care about feelings.

The “it” of v.16 is defined in v. 10 “….that the purpose of God, according to election, might stand”….

Not sure what you are attempting to say with your double negative sentence. My “feelings” have nothing to do with my understanding of this text.

All I want to do is discuss Romans 9:16 and its implications on whether “election” comes before or after faith. Clearly, this passage supports the truth elections comes prior to faith.

I do not understand why you are making this personal, but I wish you would stop it. (The “it” here means making personal comments toward me.)

Peace to you

 

[JonC]

The “it” of v.16 is defined in v. 10 “….that the purpose of God, according to election, might stand”….

Not sure what you are attempting to say with your double negative sentence. My “feelings” have nothing to do with my understanding of this text.

All I want to do is discuss Romans 9:16 and its implications on whether “election” comes before or after faith. Clearly, this passage supports the truth elections comes prior to faith.

I do not understand why you are making this personal, but I wish you would stop it. (The “it” here means making personal comments toward me.)

Peace to you

But you cannot discuss just one verse with any gain. All you can hope to do is attempt to reinforce one position over another.

Remember that Scripture was not written in chapter-verse form. All Scripture is profitable.

When you look at positions you need to examine the topic using God's Word.

Now, if you want to just look at a verse within the context of the passage that is another story. I didn't think that was your intent because of your conclusions. Sorry if it was.

I will shift to just look at the Romans passage.

 

[JonC]

Romans 9:8–22 That is, it is not the children of the flesh who are children of God, but the children of the promise are regarded as descendants. For this is the word of promise: “At this time I will come, and Sarah shall have a son.” And not only this, but there was Rebekah also, when she had conceived twins by one man, our father Isaac; for though the twins were not yet born and had not done anything good or bad, so that God’s purpose according to His choice would stand, not because of works but because of Him who calls, it was said to her, “The older will serve the younger.” Just as it is written, “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.” What shall we say then? There is no injustice with God, is there? May it never be! For He says to Moses, “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.” So then it does not depend on the man who wills or the man who runs, but on God who has mercy. For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, “For this very purpose I raised you up, to demonstrate My power in you, and that My name might be proclaimed throughout the whole earth.” So then He has mercy on whom He desires, and He hardens whom He desires. You will say to me then, “Why does He still find fault? For who resists His will?” On the contrary, who are you, O man, who answers back to God? The thing molded will not say to the molder, “Why did you make me like this,” will it? Or does not the potter have a right over the clay, to make from the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for common use? What if God, although willing to demonstrate His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction? Or does not the potter have a right over the clay, to make from the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for common use?


The "it" in verse 19 refers to being Israel. Not all are Israel who descended from Israel. The question then turns to God's just nature. The solution is we have no grounds to go there - the Potter has rights over the clay.


This is one passage I use to justify reprobation.


My point, however, is not my position but that the Arminian position is actually supported by the same passage.

 

[Silverhair]

The passage does answer your question. “So His purposes” will stand.

God is not arbitrary in His will. He has specific purpose for every individual He elects and then brings into a right relationship with Himself through the power of God Holy Spirit.

peace to you

I agree God is not arbitrary and He does have a purpose for every individual, that they come to a saving knowledge of the truth, with the result that they are saved.

Joh 1:12 But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, to those who believe in His name:

That is a clear statement whereas you have just speculation on your part.Those that believe are those that are elected not your elected so they will believe.

You disagree with @JonC when he says God draws people unto Himself and making them elect when they believe.
And then you read into the Rom 9:16 text that it presents God as molding individuals from clay, each for specific purpose. Some are created by God for honorable use. Others are not.
Do we see a double standard here @canadyjd?

You are trying to make Rom 9:16 support a position that it cannot do. That verse says nothing about His purpose but just that He shows mercy. Mercy for what or from what is not presented.

God's desire or as some have it His will is to have all come to a saving knowledge of the truth. That is His purpose as we see in scripture is it not? But reality is that not all do come to a saving knowledge do they so there must be something else that has to be considered. Man's free will.

God is the first cause whether through creation, conviction of the Holy Spirit or one hearing the gospel message. But the individual can either respond in a positive or negative manner to any or all of those promptings. If the person does not trust in God for their salvation they will not be saved.

 

[canadyjd]

Romans 9:8–22 That is, it is not the children of the flesh who are children of God, but the children of the promise are regarded as descendants. For this is the word of promise: “At this time I will come, and Sarah shall have a son.” And not only this, but there was Rebekah also, when she had conceived twins by one man, our father Isaac; for though the twins were not yet born and had not done anything good or bad, so that God’s purpose according to His choice would stand, not because of works but because of Him who calls, it was said to her, “The older will serve the younger.” Just as it is written, “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.” What shall we say then? There is no injustice with God, is there? May it never be! For He says to Moses, “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.” So then it does not depend on the man who wills or the man who runs, but on God who has mercy. For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, “For this very purpose I raised you up, to demonstrate My power in you, and that My name might be proclaimed throughout the whole earth.” So then He has mercy on whom He desires, and He hardens whom He desires. You will say to me then, “Why does He still find fault? For who resists His will?” On the contrary, who are you, O man, who answers back to God? The thing molded will not say to the molder, “Why did you make me like this,” will it? Or does not the potter have a right over the clay, to make from the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for common use? What if God, although willing to demonstrate His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction? Or does not the potter have a right over the clay, to make from the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for common use?


The "it" in verse 19 refers to Israel. Not all are Israel who descended from Israel. The question then turns to God's just nature. The solution is we have no grounds to go there - the Potter has rights over the clay.

This is one passage I use to justify reprobation.

But to apply verse 19 to mean "f mankind responds to what God has done through the power of God Holy Spirit after election, that demonstrates grace" exceeds the actual meaning of the verse.

No, the “it” in v. 16 does not refer to Israel. “It” refers to “so that God’s purpose according to election might stand”

Plea

Romans 9:8–22 That is, it is not the children of the flesh who are children of God, but the children of the promise are regarded as descendants. For this is the word of promise: “At this time I will come, and Sarah shall have a son.” And not only this, but there was Rebekah also, when she had conceived twins by one man, our father Isaac; for though the twins were not yet born and had not done anything good or bad, so that God’s purpose according to His choice would stand, not because of works but because of Him who calls, it was said to her, “The older will serve the younger.” Just as it is written, “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.” What shall we say then? There is no injustice with God, is there? May it never be! For He says to Moses, “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.” So then it does not depend on the man who wills or the man who runs, but on God who has mercy. For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, “For this very purpose I raised you up, to demonstrate My power in you, and that My name might be proclaimed throughout the whole earth.” So then He has mercy on whom He desires, and He hardens whom He desires. You will say to me then, “Why does He still find fault? For who resists His will?” On the contrary, who are you, O man, who answers back to God? The thing molded will not say to the molder, “Why did you make me like this,” will it? Or does not the potter have a right over the clay, to make from the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for common use? What if God, although willing to demonstrate His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction? Or does not the potter have a right over the clay, to make from the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for common use?

The "it" in verse 19 refers to being Israel. Not all are Israel who descended from Israel. The question then turns to God's just nature. The solution is we have no grounds to go there - the Potter has rights over the clay.

This is one passage I use to justify reprobation.

My point, however, is not my position but that the Arminian position is actually supported by the same passage.

Romans 9:23-24 . “…And that He might demonstrate the riches of His glory upon vessels of mercy prepared beforehand for glory, even us whom He has called”

You stopped short of the verse that has direct connection on this question. Why?

“Vessels of mercy”… clay (people) deliberately molded (created) by God for the purpose of God demonstrating the riches of His glory upon.

That is election according to God’s purpose. “It” doesn’t depend on the man who runs or the man who wills but on God who shows mercy. “It” refers to that His purpose will stand according to election.

Romans does not support the third option you described as God making someone elect after they believe. It simply is not there.

Believers are created by God for the purpose of God demonstrating the riches of His glory upon them.

That is what the passage states. Plain and simple. Cut and dry.

That is why my original statement stands. If God responds to what mankind does to make them elect, it is a works based salvation and contrary to Romans 9. If mankind responds to what God has done, that is grace and is consistent with Romans 9.

Thanks for the comment.

peace to you

 

[canadyjd]

I agree God is not arbitrary and He does have a purpose for every individual, that they come to a saving knowledge of the truth, with the result that they are saved.

Joh 1:12 But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, to those who believe in His name:

That is a clear statement whereas you have just speculation on your part.Those that believe are those that are elected not your elected so they will believe.

You disagree with @JonC when he says God draws people unto Himself and making them elect when they believe.
And then you read into the Rom 9:16 text that it presents God as molding individuals from clay, each for specific purpose. Some are created by God for honorable use. Others are not.
Do we see a double standard here @canadyjd?

You are trying to make Rom 9:16 support a position that it cannot do. That verse says nothing about His purpose but just that He shows mercy. Mercy for what or from what is not presented.

God's desire or as some have it His will is to have all come to a saving knowledge of the truth. That is His purpose as we see in scripture is it not? But reality is that not all do come to a saving knowledge do they so there must be something else that has to be considered. Man's free will.

God is the first cause whether through creation, conviction of the Holy Spirit or one hearing the gospel message. But the individual can either respond in a positive or negative manner to any or all of those promptings. If the person does not trust in God for their salvation they will not be saved.

You are in error because you do not know or understand scripture. I have neither the time or patience to attempt to correct you.

peace to you

 

[JonC]

No, the “it” in v. 16 does not refer to Israel. “It” refers to “so that God’s purpose according to election might stand”

I disagree.

The reason is Paul specifically points out that Israel (God's people) is not all the descendents of Israel (he continues to include Gentiles as well).

Then Paul goes through examples of God choosing (for various purposes). He concludes this just.

The argument is against the backdrop of Israel being God's people and designed to demonstrate God just even as not all of the descendents of Israel are included.[/QUOTE]

 

[canadyjd]

Again, why did you leave out v. 23-24? They are clearly connected to the doctrine of election. God created specific people to demonstrate the riches of His glory upon…. “Even us whom He has called”

You are correct we disagree. But that is ok too.

peace to you