Why bring up hardening?

This topic doesn't disgust me brother, I think it is awesome that you have acheived over 1100 posts from this one topic

God Bless.
Bro. Dallas

 

Perhaps Romans 9, 10, and 11 ought to be considered in light of the type of meaning of the whole Roman letter.

Exegetically, in Romans, Paul is explaining Salvation. He begins with condemnation. He proceeds with justification, then sanctification and glorification. He notes Israel's past, present and future in light of their election by God. He ends by discussing consecration.

Paul was answering either a real or hypothetical question in chapters 9-11: If God elected Israel to be His chosen people, then why isn't all Israel saved? Part of Paul's answer has to do with faith righteousness vs. works righteousness. In addition, Paul states that not all Israel is Israel. Only Israel who has the faith of Abraham is Israel. Therefore, not all Jews (in Israel) will be saved.

Specifically, Romans 9 is about the Sovereignty of God in choosing those of faith in Israel. Chapter 10 is about Israel's rejection of Christ. And Chapter 11 is about Israel's rejection not being total and the purpose of her rejection (the salvation of Gentiles).

God's hardening of Israel is predicated upon the premise of her acceptance by God in the exodus from Egypt and the giving of His commands to her at Sinai.

The pure Arminian scheme falls to pieces when Romans 9-11 is considered within the textual constructions of the corresponding type of meaning of the whole of Romans, as well as the textual constructions of the component meanings in the pericopes of Romans.

Romans 9-11 corresponds beautifully with Paul's holistic message in the letter.

rufus

 

Excuse me? Arminianism is based on Faith of the individual which makes one an Abrahamic believer.

Arminianism is not based on divine choice, but rather divine providence (provid-ence) in which God provides the means by which man can come to have faith, and God has done all the work. It is the work of the Father unto belief. The Father requires no belief, he is the object of belief. But all the work is done, completed by Jesus upon the cross of atonement. There is nothing man do for his own salvation except weigh the evidence and believe. Believing is not a work, so salvation cannot be of works. Abraham's deeds were not what saved him, it was his faith in God that was counted as righteousness before God. That is why God established his covenant in Abraham.

If a Calvinist would honestly look at the whole of scripture instead of homesteading on a select few scriptures, he would see that it is God who provided all that is necessary for man to believe and thus be saved by grace through faith. It is not God's imputed faith in God that saves man. It is man's derived faith in God that brings salvation.

 

This very much reminds me of Deism, the idea that God set everything in motion but now He is hands off, that's it now up to man to make the best of his situation in the crapshoot of life that he is dealt.

How sad that anyone who claims to be a Christian would have such a view of Almighty God.

It is truly sad when a person who claims to be a Christian promotes an obviously man-centered religion.

 

Brother Dallas... You brought up a very good point with that many posts he doesn't even know what he believes!... I know this about the Calvinist and Primitive Baptist brethren and those of our persuasion... "WE KNOW WHAT WE BELIEVE... AND BACK DOWN TO NONE!" You others are free to waver at WILL... Oh no there's that word again... Free to waver at will?... Did you get it? ... Oops!... Brother Glen ROFLOL

 

Heaven forbid we take a humble approach, knowing what we believe, but having an open enough mind to admit that we may not be completely right about certain things.

Such an attitude was found by Mr. Arminius. Perhaps the Calvinists, Primitive Baptists, and those of your "persuasion" would do well adopting a similar attitude.

 

Well excuse me Scott the Arminian brethren are just reeking in humility... Is that a hoot or what? ... Hey I'm dying here... Being among all you pious brethren! ... Some one please start a thread on humility!... Brother Glen

 

Let us review. We have your post that was mentioned, then the post I began on Arminius' view of eternal security, where he admitted that he was still learning about the Bible and could possibly be wrong on such things.

I believe the information speaks for itself.

 

And who is responsible for man's inability? Man himself. Man sinned and brought this woe on himself.

The lack of understanding and acceptance of the Biblical doctrine of the inability of man is based on man's pride. Man does not want to admit that he can play absolutely no role in his salvation. He wants to be able to claim at least some small contribution - even as small as simply nodding his head to "accept" Christ by his own will and effort.

The basic problem with Arminianism, once the curtain is pulled back on it, is simply human pride.

 

It is a copout to those who would compromise to say to the man that declares the truth without apology to say he is not humble, he is contentious, etc.

No one wants the preacher to speak from his heart, they would rather hear with each sermon, 'I think this is right, but I could be wrong' This kind of preacher brings up two thoughts to me:

1) Is he reading the word of truth or of man?
2) Has he any conviction that any thing is true, or does he doubt even the Word of God.

Those that I know of the Sovereign Grace camp who declare the word out without apology I thank God for; for truth is not afraid to be laid on the table for all the world to see, investigate, to scrutinize, it is man who does not wish to be scrutinized. The word of truth goes beyond the flesh and seeks to enter into the soul and by the one who is the searcher of the hearts of men it brings out those secret sins we desire to hold to and causes us to cry unto God to purge us. If we tell the people this and this and that, but I may be wrong, it breeds distrust of the word of God and men develop the idea (false as it is) that truth is relevant. If I declare the truth with out apology and makes men to search the scripture, even if I am proved wrong it will have proven beneficial to they who have searched God's word and it will vindicate God's word while putting me in my place. This is what men fear; all men. That they will be found wrong, then they dance with their feet and speak great swelling words then they say 'This may not be right.' Speak out the Word of God as it is spoken in your heart; where the truth of it is not, honestly speak this out and when the light of Grace reveals more truth to you then you can be sure it is time to speak that out; do not speak of God as possible wrong. 'What I speak to you in private, preach publicly'

God Bless.
Bro. Dallas

 

My experience with Non Calvinists has been quite the opposite. They want to give man some ability to choose because they'd rather blame man for the bad stuff than God.

Jacob.

 

Yep. See there's the problem. In a misguided effort to somehow "protect" God(as if the Creator needs protecting by puny, sin-soaked man) from being blamed for the "bad", man must also set up the scenario to take at least some credit in producing the "good".

Thanks for helping to bring that point to light, Jacob.

 

Please, Bill, I urge you, quit kicking against the goads, quit denying that whether you are saved or damned is totally in God's hands. Accept the fact that you can't stop God's will for you. You will be so much happier and can be satisfied in Him if you do.

 

And since when did you either become "Boss Moderator" or when did this board get renamed the "Bill Board"?

Furthermore, no one in this forum is forced to read my posts, so if they are a waisting(sic) of your time, don't read them.

You know sometimes, Bill, you are not a very nice person.

[ May 06, 2003, 02:27 AM: Message edited by: KenH ]

 

I did not dismiss Jacob with a one liner and I resent you saying I did so. I dovetailed my comments behind his to make a very valid point.

I have noticed, Bill, that you tend to retreat into your shell and call other people's points one liners and dismissive when they are clearly not. Sometimes you can get away with that as I admit that I do throw out some zingers. But you are off the mark this time and you need to be more careful in the future with your accusations toward me. Okay, brother?

 

Bro. Bill,

I thought I read your answer to this to say you actually agree with this...if this is so, then what is your argument?

Do you agree that you can't stop God's will for you? Do you agree you can't change God's will for you? The difficulty you guys have is not that do men choose, you truly despise the Sovereignty of God, you see, we permit all who will come to do so, because they come by the sovereign drawing power of God; thus the difficulty is at your doorstep. Not ours.

Bro. dallas