Featured Romans 9 Isn't What You Think It Is - continued...

No, it is not deism and he has not abdicated control. It is Bible. God does not use the word sovereignty in the KJV Bible because he is not presenting himself as sovereign in the manner in which you people define sovereignty as determinism. God presents himself as owning the earth because he created it and can do what he pleases with it and it has pleased him to give it to the children of men as stewards over it and who must give account of their stewardship. The classic conversation recorded between God and a man after the fall proves this and nothing has modified it between then and now.

1 And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from the LORD.
2 And she again bare his brother Abel. And Abel was a keeper of sheep, but Cain was a tiller of the ground.

3 And in process of time it came to pass, that Cain brought of the fruit of the ground an offering unto the LORD.
4 And Abel, he also brought of the firstlings of his flock and of the fat thereof. And the LORD had respect unto Abel and to his offering:
5 But unto Cain and to his offering he had not respect. And Cain was very wroth, and his countenance fell.

6 And the LORD said unto Cain, Why art thou wroth? and why is thy countenance fallen?
7 If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him.

8 And Cain talked with Abel his brother: and it came to pass, when they were in the field, that Cain rose up against Abel his brother, and slew him.

9 And the LORD said unto Cain, Where is Abel thy brother? And he said, I know not: Am I my brother’s keeper?
10 And he said, What hast thou done? the voice of thy brother’s blood crieth unto me from the ground.
11 And now art thou cursed from the earth, which hath opened her mouth to receive thy brother’s blood from thy hand;
12 When thou tillest the ground, it shall not henceforth yield unto thee her strength; a fugitive and a vagabond shalt thou be in the earth.

This curse affected Cain's whole family. The earth would not yield it's strength. No wonder they would want to kill him. They probably thought God would be appeased for the death of Abel if they killed Cain and the curse would be removed.

13 And Cain said unto the LORD, My punishment is greater than I can bear.
14 Behold, thou hast driven me out this day from the face of the earth; and from thy face shall I be hid; and I shall be a fugitive and a vagabond in the earth; and it shall come to pass, that every one that findeth me shall slay me.
15 And the LORD said unto him, Therefore whosoever slayeth Cain, vengeance shall be taken on him sevenfold. And the LORD set a mark upon Cain, lest any finding him should kill him.

16 And Cain went out from the presence of the LORD, and dwelt in the land of Nod, on the east of Eden.
_________________________________________

Why is it expected of us to call men Christians who present their view of God as a person who programs a man to kill his brother from eternity past and then enquires of him why he did it and accuses him of wrong doing?
__________________________________________
And why did God treat a man differently 2500 years later when we have this record of God and man?

Num 15:30 But the soul that doeth ought presumptuously, whether he be born in the land, or a stranger, the same reproacheth the LORD; and that soul shall be cut off from among his people.
31 Because he hath despised the word of the LORD, and hath broken his commandment, that soul shall utterly be cut off; his iniquity shall be upon him.
32 And while the children of Israel were in the wilderness, they found a man that gathered sticks upon the sabbath day.
33 And they that found him gathering sticks brought him unto Moses and Aaron, and unto all the congregation.
34 And they put him in ward, because it was not declared what should be done to him.
35 And the LORD said unto Moses, The man shall be surely put to death: all the congregation shall stone him with stones without the camp.
36 And all the congregation brought him without the camp, and stoned him with stones, and he died; as the LORD commanded Moses.

This is the same LORD in both of these stories who said at one point, "For I am the LORD, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed." Mal 3:6
Which man did the greater sin in our eyes? And which of the men did a greater sin in God's eyes? How do you reason this out?

The one man had no law of God against murder in Gen 4 while the man in Numbers 15 was of a people who contracted with God to keep his law of their own free will. God said to that people, "don't pick up sticks on the sabbath day."

Ex 19:7 And Moses came and called for the elders of the people, and laid before their faces all these words which the LORD commanded him.
8 And all the people answered together, and said, All that the LORD hath spoken we will do. And Moses returned the words of the people unto the LORD.

Ro 4:15 Because the law worketh wrath: for where no law is, there is no transgression.

None of this speaks of sovereignty as in determinism. It speaks of cause and effect.

 

MLV Romans 9:11, for* the children were not yet born, nor had practiced anything good or evil, in-order-that the purpose of God according-to his choice might abide, not from works, but from the one who is calling.

 

And before, called by various other names, all the way back to Jesus Commissioning His Disciples that had been saved and prepared for Him,
by John the Baptist who baptized them by The Authority of God,
as He began building His individual, self-governing,
bodies under His Rule, as their Head.

They certainly thoroughly taught all The Eternal Doctrines of Grace,
in addition to Jesus Himself, as have all of The Lord's Churches,
since that time.

As a point in fact Job, in Job, and Moses, in Genesis,
all the other Old Testament writers, and as far back in Eternity
as you want to venture, The Triune Godhead always Teaches
all about The Doctrines of Grace.

As saturated and dripping, press down, shaken together, and running over
as The Doctrines of Grace are laced & threaded in and through every detail
and chapter of The Bible, it's surreal that anyone would think
that associating a man's name with them,
just because of his having arranged and systematized them,
would be appropriate.

John Calvin didn't think so.

No more than Elvis truly thought that calling him The King of anything
was quite right, in light of Jesus' Title as The king of Kings.

It's just one more cheap disparagement of The Cause of God,
God, and The Bible.

And it's too cheap to talk about, really.

Part 2 - of the book by John Gill called The Cause of God and Truth,
beginning in Chapter 1. Introduction - of Reprobation pg 235,
thru to Election, Redemption, Efficacious Grace,
The Corruption of Human Nature, and Preservation, on pg 422,
has dozens of specific scriptures that he calls our attention to,
(just like throughout the entire other 'Parts' of that book),
which are at times not understood properly,
by those not called to know.

The Doctrines of Grace have simply been hidden from them,
because they are everywhere in The Bible.

In spades, in black and white,
as plain as The Hand of God, contained in His Loveletter to Mankind
right in front of everyone's face, without excuse, as they say.

And, we surely know that every last minor detail regarding the future
are mirrored and reflected in every word of their teaching.

Great, God-Honoring revelation to God's saints.

"The fear of God is the beginning of wisdom", not man's bright ideas.
Proverbs 1:7; comp. Psalm 111:10

& Job 28:28
"And unto man he said, Behold,
the fear of the Lord, that is wisdom;
and to depart from evil is understanding."

 

You will probably disagree with my exegesis, but I hope you will at least acknowledge that it is my exegesis and not dismiss it with a spurious ‘taint so’ as so many others have …

John 6:44 "No one can come to Me [Total Inability] unless the Father who sent Me [Unconditional Selection] draws him [Irresistible Grace]; and I will raise him up on the last day. [Preservation of the Saints]

So we can debate the Atonement (if we must), but I personally view that as an exercise in futility. NOBODY thinks EVERYONE is saved, so there is a limit somewhere … thus the pointless arguments over whether the limit is “God giving grace” or “man providing faith” of Ephesians 2:8-9 fame. And that misses the core point of both the Atonement and Ephesians 2 [which is Jesus died to save, and God saved … YOU and ME!]

 

Isa 45:1-7 [KJV] 1 Thus saith the LORD to his anointed, to Cyrus, whose right hand I have holden, to subdue nations before him; and I will loose the loins of kings, to open before him the two leaved gates; and the gates shall not be shut; 2 I will go before thee, and make the crooked places straight: I will break in pieces the gates of brass, and cut in sunder the bars of iron: 3 And I will give thee the treasures of darkness, and hidden riches of secret places, that thou mayest know that I, the LORD, which call [thee] by thy name, [am] the God of Israel. 4 For Jacob my servant's sake, and Israel mine elect, I have even called thee by thy name: I have surnamed thee, though thou hast not known me. 5 I [am] the LORD, and [there is] none else, [there is] no God beside me: I girded thee, though thou hast not known me: 6 That they may know from the rising of the sun, and from the west, that [there is] none beside me. I [am] the LORD, and [there is] none else. 7 I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these [things].

… it may not use the word, but THAT is Sovereignty as I use the term!

 

Logically the only thing that can be said of this verse is that those that are raised on the last day are:
1} drawn
2} will have come to Christ

The problem is that the passage does not say that the drawing guarantees the “coming”. That is something that must be read into the passage. John 6:44 does not support your view. You have read your theological view into the verse and ignored context.

I agree NOBODY thinks EVERYONE is saved, so there is a limit somewhere …. and scripture provides the answer in the next verse.

John 6:45 "It is written in the prophets, 'AND THEY SHALL ALL BE TAUGHT OF GOD.' Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father, comes to Me.

So we see the condition stated clearly, hear the gospel believe the gospel and one is saved by God.

You mention Eph 2:8 re the disagreements but the Greek is actually quite clear. One is saved by the grace of God because they believe.

The Bible teaches the experience of salvation in Christ is voluntary. Faith cannot be coerced.

No one can make this commitment for another. No one can force such a commitment from another.

 

What is the Greek word for DRAW used there, what does it mean, where else is it used in the Bible.

Does it EVER mean “invite, but did not come”?
If they do not “come”, were they “drawn” as that word is used in scripture?

 

That is as much an interpretation as mine. The passage is silent on cause-effect. That could just as easily describe HOW God the Father draws to the Son in support of my exegesis. Each is looking through their personal lens. The words on the page actually just present a statement of fact. “Everyone who has heard and learned” is the same group that “comes to Jesus”. Back to the Ephesians 2:8-9 argument about whether the “faith” came from God or from the man. WHY did they hear and learn? God or man? It does not say, does it. You believe THEY are responsible and I believe that GOD is responsible.

 

Other verses speak of faith as a gift and a Gift of the Spirit, so I posit that “faith” can be a gift from God to a heart and mind hostile to the things of God (which the Bible does talk about).

 

The “gift” and “that” (not of yourself) are both neuter.
“Saved” is masculine.
“Grace” and “faith” are both feminine.

How do YOU know with certainty which feminine word (if not both) goes with the masculine word to form the neuter “gift” that is “not of yourself”?

• “saved by grace” or “saved by grace through faith”?
  
• Why is FAITH not included in the “that not of yourself” when it seems to be speaking of the whole phrase in English?

 

If God was acting sovereignly in his revealing his choice of Cyrus to do what he does, why would he even write V 6? Why would he care if they from the east to the west knew that there was no Jehovah beside him?

Lk 19:10 For the Son of man is come to seek and to save that which was lost.
11 And as they heard these things, he added and spake a parable, because he was nigh to Jerusalem, and because they thought that the kingdom of God should immediately appear.
12 He said therefore, A certain nobleman went into a far country to receive for himself a kingdom, and to return.
13 And he called his ten servants, and delivered them ten pounds, and said unto them, Occupy till I come.
14 But his citizens hated him, and sent a message after him, saying, We will not have this man to reign over us.
15 And it came to pass, that when he was returned, having received the kingdom, then he commanded these servants to be called unto him, to whom he had given the money, that he might know how much every man had gained by trading.
16 Then came the first, saying, Lord, thy pound hath gained ten pounds.
17 And he said unto him, Well, thou good servant: because thou hast been faithful in a very little, have thou authority over ten cities.
18 And the second came, saying, Lord, thy pound hath gained five pounds.
19 And he said likewise to him, Be thou also over five cities.
20 And another came, saying, Lord, behold, here is thy pound, which I have kept laid up in a napkin:
21 For I feared thee, because thou art an austere man: thou takest up that thou layedst not down, and reapest that thou didst not sow.
22 And he saith unto him, Out of thine own mouth will I judge thee, thou wicked servant. Thou knewest that I was an austere man, taking up that I laid not down, and reaping that I did not sow:
23 Wherefore then gavest not thou my money into the bank, that at my coming I might have required mine own with usury?
24 And he said unto them that stood by, Take from him the pound, and give it to him that hath ten pounds.
25 (And they said unto him, Lord, he hath ten pounds.)
26 For I say unto you, That unto every one which hath shall be given; and from him that hath not, even that he hath shall be taken away from him.
27 But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.
28 And when he had thus spoken, he went before, ascending up to Jerusalem.

Can you process this prophecy in your thinking? What do you think the word reign in V14 means?

 

G1670
- Original: ἑλκύω ἕλκω
- Transliteration: helkuo
- Phonetic: hel-koo’-o
- Definition:
1. to draw, drag off
2. metaph., to draw by inward power, lead, impel

Joh 6:44 "No one G3762 can G1410 (G5736) come G2064 (G5629) to G4314 Me G3165 unless G3362 the Father G3962 who G3588 sent G3992 (G5660) Me G3165 draws G1670 (G5661) him G846; and G2532 I G1473 will raise G450 (00) him G846 up G450 (G5692) at the last G2078 day G2250.

G5661
Tense-Aorist See [G5777]
Voice-Active See [G5784]
Mood -Subjunctive See [G5792]

Voice-Active
The active voice represents the subject as the doer or performer of the action.
In this case it is God that is doing the action {drawing}

Mood-Subjunctive
The subjunctive mood is the mood of possibility and potentiality. The action described may or may not occur,depending upon circumstances.
The person drawn may or may not come.

In the NKJV+ you will find G1670 helkuo Draw is found in 8 verses.
Joh_6:44, Joh_12:32, Joh_18:10, Joh_21:6, Joh_21:11, Act_16:19, Act_21:30, Jas_2:6

TDNT +
In the OT helkein draw {ABP+ G1670} denotes a powerful impulse, as in Son_1:4, which is obscure but expresses the force of love. This is the point in the two important passages in Joh_6:44; Joh_12:32. There is no thought here of force or magic. The term figuratively expresses the supernatural power of the love of God of Christ which goes out to all (Joh_12:32) but without which no one can come (Joh_6:44). The apparent contradiction shows that both the election and the universality of grace must be taken seriously; the compulsion is not automatic.


A simple reading of 6 of those verses will show a physical action is indicated but 2 will not. Joh_6:44 and Joh_12:32 both indicate a moral suasion.

Webster defines it this way: impel
To drive or urge forward; to press on; to excite to action or to move forward, by the application of physical force [which God does not use], or moral suasion or necessity.

Since God does not use physical force it leaves us with "moral suasion" which is the "act of persuading" or put another way "To influence by argument, advice, entreaty or expostulation [reasoning with a person in opposition to his conduct]; to draw or incline the will to a determination by presenting motives to the mind." see Eph_1:13

A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and other Early Christian Literature, says helkuo is used figuratively “of the pull on man’s inner life. . . . draw, attract Joh_6:44” [Bauer, Arndt, Gingrich, Danker, p. 251].

The Analytical Lexicon to the Greek New Testament, states that helkuo is used metaphorically “to draw mentally and morally, Joh_6:44; Joh_12:32” [William Mounce, p. 180].

The Greek-English Lexicon to the New Testament has, “met., to draw, i.e. to attract, Joh_12:32. Cf. Joh_6:44” [W.J. Hickie, p. 13].

The Analytical Lexicon of the Greek New Testament by Timothy Friberg, Barbara Friberg, and Neva F. Miller says, “figuratively, of a strong pull in the mental or moral life draw, attract (Joh_6:44)” [p. 144].

Hebrew-Greek Key Study Bible by Calvinist Spiros Zodhiates, says, “Helkuo is used of Jesus on the cross drawing by His love, not force (Joh_6:44; Joh_12:32)” [New Testament Lexical Aids, p. 1831].

This gracious working of God does not compel or force anyone to believe but enables all to respond to God’s commands to turn away from sin in repentance, and towards the Savior Jesus Christ in faith.

 

Sorry but mine is not interpretation, it is scripture. How do you miss the cause effect of hear and learn. You are just ignoring the text so as to hold to your philosophical position. But you have still not answered the question have you. Where is your contextual support for you view.

You said "Everyone who has heard and learned” is the same group that “comes to Jesus”. But your understanding of Jn 6:44 while it is yours, is flawed. The context does not support your view.
John 6:44 "No one can come to Me [Total Inability] unless the Father who sent Me [Unconditional Selection] draws him [Irresistible Grace]; and I will raise him up on the last day. [Preservation of the Saints]
John 6:45 tells us that "they shall all be taught by God." so if your irresistible grace is true then all would logically come to Christ. But you have pointed out the conditions, they heard and they learned but as we see in John 6:44 the drawing of God is not Irresistible but rather can be resisted. That is why Draws G1670 is in the subjective mood, the mood of possibility and potentiality. The action described may or may not occur.

The text of Eph 2:8 shows us that salvation is from God conditioned upon one's faith. I notice that you ask a lot of questions but give very few answers. Your whole view of scripture seems to be built on hypotheticals, what if's. Why do you not trust scholars such as A. T. Robertson.

For by grace (tēi gar chariti). Explanatory reason. “By the grace” already mentioned in Eph_2:5 and so with the article.

Through faith (dia pisteōs). This phrase he adds in repeating what he said in Eph_2:5 to make it plainer. “Grace” is God’s part, “faith” ours.

And that (kai touto). Neuter, not feminine tautē, and so refers not to pistis (feminine) or to charis (feminine also), but to the act of being saved by grace conditioned on faith on our part. Paul shows that salvation does not have its source (ex humōn, out of you) in men, but from God. Besides, it is God’s gift (dōron) and not the result of our work.

Or Marvin R. Vincent

For by grace, etc.
This may truly be called exceeding riches of grace, for ye are saved by grace. Grace has the article, the grace of God, in Eph_2:5, Eph_2:7.

And that
Not faith, but the salvation.

Of God
Emphatic. Of God is it the gift.

I understand that you need faith to be the gift but the text does not support your view.

 

What scripture do you use in support of your view?

 

If you are “morally impelled” to come to Jesus and do not come, were you actually “impelled”?

 

Respectfully, what difference does it make?

You will NEVER change your mind and I am not looking to argue about it. The ONE advantage that Calvinism has over Free Will (as a systematic theology) is that GOD is responsible for changing hearts and not my persuasive rhetoric.

I assume you can do a word search for “Spirit faith” and locate some candidate verses and a search for “mind hostile” and find some candidates for the other part if you really cared that much.

 

If God was acting as sovereign, what difference would it make what these people said? Where is the disconnect in logic and reason?

 

I thing that I do find with calvinists, reformed, PC's is that you actually do not read what is posted. You skim it and try to find something to pick at. You also do not actually answer questions about what you base your philosophy on. I asked you what contextual scripture you used to support your view. You have yet to provide any. I can understand why you have not done so as you do not have any that clearly supports your philosophy.

As for your question all you had to do was keep reading but that seem to be a bit hard for you to do.

 

The fact that you can not provide any clear contextual scripture to support your view has become obvious. And since you do not have clear contextualized scripture to support your view you are not able to provide any persuasive rhetoric.

I do not require a systematic theology to find the truth in scripture. Man is responsible for changing his heart as regards his understanding of who God is. God does not force or drag people to Himself as you seem to think.

The main difference between you and I is that I trust scripture and the God presented in scripture for my salvation and you trust in your TULIP and the deterministic God not found in scripture for your salvation.

 

Respectfully, the definition of the word was at its softest “impel”

Reading to the end includes a great deal of tap-dancing that somehow redefines a word with a core meaning of “to drag off” to be a non-binding impotent attempt at persuasion.

So I returned to the ACTUAL definition. If they do not come, they were not DRAWN, DRAGGED, LEAD or IMPELLED. Therefore, when God says: “No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him” that DRAW indicates that they WILL come (or it is a NOT DRAW).