Robert Haldane oon Ro.9:13

[Rippon]

When men , ... pervert the obvious meaning of the word of God , in order to maintain their preconceived systems , it manifests deplorable dissaffection to the truth of God , and most culpabe inattention to His plainest declarations .

... they prove they misapprehend the whole drift of the Apostle's argument... Does the idea of loving less consist with the idea held forth in the expression vessels of wrath ?

We may therefore safely conclude that the Apostle does not so much speak of the posterity , as of the persons of Jacob and Esau ; and that he knew the prophecies he quotes in support of his argument not to refer alone to that posterity ; and consequently that it is certain he does speak of the eternal state of Jacob and Esau .

I just thought that Robert Haldane's words relating to Romans 9:13 needed to be cited again .

From post #11

 

[Rippon]

...Paul ... refers not to the external condition of the Jews , ... but to their spiritual state ... the whole tenor of his discourse makes it obvious that he is treating of their spiritual and eternal condition , this is conclusively evident from what he says in the 22d and 23rd verses ... where he speaks , on the one hand , of the vessels of wrath , fitted to destruction , and , on the other , of the vessels of mercy , prepared unto glory . These two verses , were there no other proof , evince beyond all doubt what is his object . His lamentation for his countrymen was not called forth on account of the loss of their external privileges ... it is evident that by the wrath and destruction of which the others were vessels , he means something very different from temporal calamities ... What trifling , then , what wresting of this important portion of the word of God , what turning of it entirely away from its true meaning , to represent this chapter , as so many do , as treating of the outward state of the Jews , or to deny , with others , that the spiritual and everlasting condition of Jacob and Esau are here referred to !... It is better to submit to the word of God on this and every other subject , taking it in its obvious import , than to to be deterred from doing so on account of consequences from the admission of which we may shrink back .

From post #13

 

[Rippon]

Aside from the Bible itself which is in a category not to be compared with any other book -- of uninspired literature , I value Robert Haldane's Exposition of Romans very highly . He spends 13 pages on Romans 9:13 . I will give glimpses of his take on God's hatred .

If God's love to Jacob was real literal love , God's hatred to Esau must be real literal hatred .

If God says that He hated Esau , are we to avoid receiving God's testimony , or justified in employing a mode of torture in expounding His words ?

The opinion held by some , that it may be questioned whether God be ever said to hate any man , is contrary to the revealed character of God . This sentiment appears to be near akin to that of the heathen philosophers , who held it as a maxim that God could not be angry with anyone . Like many other unfounded dogmas , it stands in direct opposition to the whole tenor of the Scriptures ...

Nothing can be more unjustifiable than this method of tampering with and perverting the word of God , and nothing can be more uncalled for ... In God's hatred of sinners , as in all His attributes , there is nothing of sinful feeling ... We must in this , and in all things , submit to God's word , and believe it as it speaks , and not as we would have it to speak .

This is from the first post .

 

[webdog]

His words were wrong last year...and remain wrong this year, too, as Helen noted back then.

What's with all of these old threads being rekindled?

 

[Rippon]

A greater snare cannot be laid for your piety and your judgment , than that which consists in making love His paramount or His only perfection ... it must be comfortable to have a god who is divested of all that is frowning and indignant towards transgressors , and clothed with all that is compassionate and kind. Whenever there is a soft or a sentimental temperment at work , that representation of the Divine nature must be peculiarly pleasing and acceptable ... this partial and unscriptural view of the character of God adopted as the leading principle of certain systems of theology , but it is held and cherished and acted upon by multitudes , whose sole concern inmatters of faith is to have not what is true , but what is agreeable , and who find in the tenet we are speaking of , the most soothing and satisfying of all persuasions , -- that God loves every one of His creatures with such an affection... I warn you against the delusion ...so destructive of that mystery of godliness and of grace which has been made known to us in Jesus Christ .

From Post #4

 

[Rippon]

But the truth is , that all opposition to the plain and obvious meaning of this passage proceeds from ignorance of , or inattention to , the state of death and ruin in which all men by nature lie , and from which no man can be recovered by any outward means alone , however powerful in themselves . This cannot be effected by anything short of the unmerited and invincibly efficacious grace of God , operating in the heart of those on whom He will have mercy according to His sovereign good pleasure .

From Post #15

 

[canadyjd]

Of course God can be angry and hate -- even people. But there is nothing in the Bible that says He hates all people who are not born again!

His hate is directed at those who persist in evil, who are purposefully and consistently wicked....

Wouldn't that include everyone that is not "born again"?

 

[Rippon]

...Paul ... refers not to the external condition of the Jews , ... but to their spiritual state ... the whole tenor of his discourse makes it obvious that he is treating of their spiritual and eternal condition , this is conclusively evident from what he says in the 22d and 23rd verses ... where he speaks , on the one hand , of the vessels of wrath , fitted to destruction , and , on the other , of the vessels of mercy , prepared unto glory . These two verses , were there no other proof , evince beyond all doubt what is his object . His lamentation for his countrymen was not called forth on account of the loss of their external privileges ... it is evident that by the wrath and destruction of which the others were vessels , he means something very different from temporal calamities ... What trifling , then , what wresting of this important portion of the word of God , what turning of it entirely away from its true meaning , to represent this chapter , as so many do , as treating of the outward state of the Jews , or to deny , with others , that the spiritual and everlasting condition of Jacob and Esau are here referred to !... It is better to submit to the word of God on this and every other subject , taking it in its obvious import , than to to be deterred from doing so on account of consequences from the admission of which we may shrink back .

This repost is for the benefit of Skandelon.

 

[quantumfaith]

"We are told to simply believe."

You're living in the world of Peter Pan. That's not what God meant when He said we must believe. God meant to trust Him and lean not on our own understanding. In all your ways acknowledge Him, and He will make your paths straight.

Right now your paths are a tangled mess. You're not trusting Him. Trusting Him means not having to mangle the meaning of His words because if you read them right you just might find out that He's not the kind of God you thought He was.

He's even better than you think He is, but you'll never find that out. You refuse to leave your fairy tale world of "God is not willing that any perish, and by any, he meant any man who ever lived, lives or will live". It doesn't matter that your private interpretation of the what He means by the word "world" (and "all", and "any", and all the other flimsy foundations upon which your conclusions above stand) contradict the plain and simple meaning of so many other scriptures.

You refuse to leave your world of the fairy tale God who loves everyone equally and would never be so unfair as to "offer" salvation to one person and not another (which is based on yet another wrong premise, that it is up to us to decide anyway).

As for me, I give up. I'm taking a break from trying to yank people out of their fantasy worlds. See y'all later.

Good thing that we have you to enlighten us as to what God had "meant" throughout the pages of scripture.

 

[quantumfaith]

My comments are in brackets.

Matthew 26:31
Then Jesus said to them [followers of Jesus - disciples], "You will all fall away because of Me this night, for it is written, ' I WILL STRIKE DOWN THE SHEPHERD, AND THE SHEEP OF THE FLOCK SHALL BE SCATTERED.'

Matthew 24:10
10"At that time many will fall away - [implies this is refering to believers since one cannot fall from a position if he was never in that position in the first place] - and will betray one another and hate one another.

Luke 8:11-15
11"Now the parable is this: the seed is the word of God.
12"Those beside the road are those who have heard; then the devil comes and takes away the word from their heart, so that they will not believe and be saved.
13"Those on the rocky soil are those who, when they hear, receive the word with joy; and these have no firm root; they believe for a while, and in time of temptation fall away. - [saying they "believe" implies that these are people who do become believers (Christians) but it does not last since it says they "fall away"] -
14"The seed which fell among the thorns, these are the ones who have heard, and as they go on their way they are choked with worries and riches and pleasures of this life, and bring no fruit to maturity.
15"But the seed in the good soil, these are the ones who have heard the word in an honest and good heart, and hold it fast - [this verse is obviously talking about those that become Christians - why would this say that they "hold it ('the word') fast" if it would be impossible for them not to do this? - if they are eternally secure no matter what, then why even say anything about them "holding it fast"?] - and bear fruit with perseverance.

1 Timothy 4:1
But the Spirit explicitly says that in later times some will fall away from the faith, - [addressing believers (Christians) since these people were obviously in the "faith" as they could not have fell from it otherwise] - paying attention to deceitful spirits and doctrines of demons,

Hebrews 3:12
Take care, brethren - [again, refering to believers], - that there not be in any one of you an evil, unbelieving heart that falls away from the living God. - [why warn these people of the possibility of them getting an evil, unbelieving heart and of falling away if it would be impossible for them to do so?]

Hebrews 6:4-6
4For in the case of those who have once been enlightened and have tasted of the heavenly gift and have been made partakers of the Holy Spirit,
5and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to come,
6and then have fallen away - [addressing believers and says that they can fall away], - it is impossible to renew them again to repentance, since they again crucify to themselves the Son of God and put Him to open shame.

2 Peter 3:17
You therefore, beloved, knowing this beforehand, be on your guard so that you are not carried away by the error of unprincipled men and fall from your own steadfastness, - [context implies that believers are being addressed - they cannot fall from their own steadfastness unless they are in a position to fall from steadfastness in the first place]

Galatians 5:18-22
18But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the Law.
19Now the deeds of the flesh are evident, which are: immorality, impurity, sensuality,
20idolatry, sorcery, enmities, strife, jealousy, outbursts of anger, disputes, dissensions, factions,
21envying, drunkenness, carousing, and things like these, of which I forewarn you, just as I have forewarned you, that those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God. - [why is it assumed that a person that once professed faith in Jesus as Saviour is exempt from this warning?]


1 Corinthians 6:8-10
8On the contrary, you yourselves wrong and defraud. You do this even to your brethren.
9Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals,
10nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God. - [again, why is it assumed that if one that once professed faith in Jesus Christ, fell into these types of sins, he would still inherit the kingdom of God?]

Revelation 21:7-9
7"He who overcomes will inherit these things - [seems to be implying that one that is a believer could possibly not overcome] -, and I will be his God and he will be My son.
8"But for the cowardly and unbelieving and abominable and murderers and immoral persons and sorcerers and idolaters and all liars, their part will be in the lake that burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death."

Hebrews 3
1Therefore, holy brethren, partakers of a heavenly calling, - [referencing believers] - consider Jesus, the Apostle and High Priest of our confession;
2He was faithful to Him who appointed Him, as Moses also was in all His house.
3For He has been counted worthy of more glory than Moses, by just so much as the builder of the house has more honor than the house.
4For every house is built by someone, but the builder of all things is God.
5Now Moses was faithful in all His house as a servant, for a testimony of those things which were to be spoken later;
6but Christ was faithful as a Son over His house--whose house we are, if we hold fast our confidence and the boast of our hope firm until the end.
7Therefore, just as the Holy Spirit says,
"TODAY IF YOU HEAR HIS VOICE,
8DO NOT HARDEN YOUR HEARTS AS WHEN THEY PROVOKED ME,
AS IN THE DAY OF TRIAL IN THE WILDERNESS,
9WHERE YOUR FATHERS TRIED Me BY TESTING Me,
AND SAW MY WORKS FOR FORTY YEARS.
10"THEREFORE I WAS ANGRY WITH THIS GENERATION,
AND SAID, 'THEY ALWAYS GO ASTRAY IN THEIR HEART,
AND THEY DID NOT KNOW MY WAYS';
11AS I SWORE IN MY WRATH,
'THEY SHALL NOT ENTER MY REST.'"
12Take care, brethren, that there not be in any one of you an evil, unbelieving heart that falls away from the living God. - [this verse is addressing brethen (believers) and says that falling away is a possibility]
13But encourage one another day after day, as long as it is still called "Today," so that none of you will be hardened by the deceitfulness of sin.
14For we have become partakers of Christ, if we hold fast the beginning of our assurance firm until the end, - [the word, "if" , means that is possible that a believer could not hold fast in which case, as this says, the person will no longer be a partaker of Christ] - 15while it is said,
"TODAY IF YOU HEAR HIS VOICE,
DO NOT HARDEN YOUR HEARTS, AS WHEN THEY PROVOKED ME."
16For who provoked Him when they had heard? Indeed, did not all those who came out of Egypt led by Moses?
17And with whom was He angry for forty years? Was it not with those who sinned, whose bodies fell in the wilderness?
18And to whom did He swear that they would not enter His rest, but to those who were disobedient?
19So we see that they were not able to enter because of unbelief. - [this is comparing a Christain's walk with Jesus to the Jew's walk with God in the wilderness - because of their unbelief they were denied access to His rest - it also equates their disobedience to their unbelief - this seems then to be implying that if a believer is disobedient and has unbelief (or that disobedience would be a sign that the person would be in unbelief), he will not be able to enter into God's rest which seems like a reference to eternity with God]

I have no doubt that some that believe in OSAS will probably find a way to try to explain these verses in the context of OSAS. However, the people that believe in conditional security would probably do the same with verses presented by those that believe in OSAS to support that doctrine. I think that there are verses that could be used to support either doctrine. However, I believe that the doctrine that seems to flow more easily from the Bible is that of conditional security. In other words, I think one has to try harder to make verses "fit" the doctrine of OSAS than one does for the belief of conditional security.

Very good post dntccc. I have often personally struggled with this doctrine, usually relying on OSAS, as it was always more "comforting". Thanks for "boiling it down" and backing it up. Much to contemplate here. Thanks.

 

[Marcia]

I think in "God hated Esau" we have to let the Bible define that, not us.

In context and when compared with other scripture, this indicates God choosing one over the other: He chooses Jacob over Esau. I don't think we can justify hating people on our part or say God has feelings of hatred for people.

The NET Bible renders the Malachi source for this as:

“Esau was Jacob’s brother,” the Lord explains, “yet I chose Jacobhttp://net.bible.org/verse.php?book=Mal&chapter=1&verse=3 and rejected Esau

and has this Note:

Heb “and I loved Jacob, but Esau I hated.” The context indicates this is technical covenant vocabulary in which “love” and “hate” are synonymous with “choose” and “reject” respectively (see Deut 7:8; Jer 31:3; Hos 3:1; 9:15; 11:1)

 

[Marcia]

Very good post dntccc. I have often personally struggled with this doctrine, usually relying on OSAS, as it was always more "comforting". Thanks for "boiling it down" and backing it up. Much to contemplate here. Thanks.

Then you are believing that you keep your salvation by works? What action(s) is/are enough to lose salvation?

The problem with interpreting Hebrews this way is that you make it contradict other passages that indicate eternal security, including things that Jesus said.

 

[quantumfaith]

Then you are believing that you keep your salvation by works? What action(s) is/are enough to lose salvation?

The problem with interpreting Hebrews this way is that you make it contradict other passages that indicate eternal security, including things that Jesus said.

Marcia

I am saying exactly what I have said, I have often "struggled" with the concept OSAS. dntcc pointed out very clearly that there exist many scriptures, dont recall if he quoted James or not, which indicate that salvation and "works" go hand in hand. When we become "saved" then yes "works" should follow from our love and gratefulness to our God for offering us such a wonderful and precious gift, that of being a member of His family. Do you think it possible for one to "renounce" their salvation? I am not trying to fight here, just being honest.

 

[Rippon]

When men , ... pervert the obvious meaning of the word of God , in order to maintain their preconceived systems , it manifests deplorable dissaffection to the truth of God , and most culpabe inattention to His plainest declarations .

... they prove they misapprehend the whole drift of the Apostle's argument... Does the idea of loving less consist with the idea held forth in the expression vessels of wrath ?

We may therefore safely conclude that the Apostle does not so much speak of the posterity , as of the persons of Jacob and Esau ; and that he knew the prophecies he quotes in support of his argument not to refer alone to that posterity ; and consequently that it is certain he does speak of the eternal state of Jacob and Esau .

Yes, Mr. Haldane. I agree.

 

[Marcia]

Marcia

I am saying exactly what I have said, I have often "struggled" with the concept OSAS. dntcc pointed out very clearly that there exist many scriptures, dont recall if he quoted James or not, which indicate that salvation and "works" go hand in hand. When we become "saved" then yes "works" should follow from our love and gratefulness to our God for offering us such a wonderful and precious gift, that of being a member of His family. Do you think it possible for one to "renounce" their salvation? I am not trying to fight here, just being honest.

Well, I guess I have never struggled with OSAS so I probably don't have much sympathy for those who do. It seems so crystal clear to me that we do not lose our salvation.

As for the hypothetical as to whether someone who is saved can renounce their salvation (which is what I think you are asking), I tend to think "no." For one thing, I do not think a saved person would want to.

I do believe that saved people can drift and even get into cults or non-christian religions but that the Holy Spirit convicts them. They may or may not respond to the Holy Spirit, but the Spirit continues to convict. In my ministry, when I hear this type of story from believers, they have never renounced Jesus but sort of blended him with other beliefs or put him on the shelf, so to speak, but they do not renounce him.

I also think it's possible that a believer who truly drifts into immoral living or a non-Christian belief and who does not follow the conviction of the Spirit may be taken home. There are biblical examples for this.

 

[Benjamin]

Learn how to type, Rippoon!




:smilewinkgrin:

 

[Rippon]

Learn how to type, Rippoon!




:smilewinkgrin:

I pointed out this typo in "Bad English In Thread Titles" seven months ago. You're behind the times.