about Esau

[Helen]

Thank you, Preach, but Scripture is what this is all about. That's why I posted what I did at the beginning -- I want to pay attention to what Scripture is really saying, not what we would like it to say to support our own particular views.

Scripture is what this thread is all about...

 

[Aaron]

I have done studies like Helen numerous times only to check the commentators later. I was thrilled when most of the time my observations and applications were right in line with someone like Matthew Henry or John Calvin, though they were better able to express the ideas.

That is why many times I quote them rather than stating my own position. Who is Aaron?

There have been Arminian commentators for centuries. Perhaps Helen could present one whose views parallel those she has of Esau.

 

[Helen]

Aaron, I didn't deal with any commentators on either side; only with what the Bible says. I'd rather stick with Scripture. I'm not Arminian, so I would not reference them anyway! I did bring up a cultural point regarding identifying a person by place of origin and ancestry, but that was all the extra-biblical material I presented. And that is not opinion -- it is something that can be checked an verified both as current and as historical fact.

 

[Daniel David]

Originally posted by Helen:
I'm not Arminian...

Helen, you will have to forgive me here, this is apparently one of those times when I don't know if you are joking or not.

You deny that God has the final say in salvation. You believe man is sovereign and God only tries to give men the best possible chance of being saved.

By the definition of everyone but you, that is Arminian. So, you are Arminian, unless of course you were joking.

 

[Daniel David]

I posted this in the first post of this page:

Verse 16 says, "So then it is not of him who wills, nor of him who runs, but of God who shows mercy." That sounds pretty individual to me. If a person is saved, it is because God chose to save him. Non-elect people have no chance, because God is not a God of chance.

Now, that is Paul's conclusion in dealing with Jacob/Esau and Isaac/Ishmael. Helen, you are trying to lift verses out of context them and then force them into a preconceived idea. If you continue reading what Paul had to say, you would have seen verse 16 on your own. It demands the interpretation I am giving. PM me and I will help you understand to the best of my abilities what this passage means.

Have a nice day.

 

[Helen]

Originally posted by PreachtheWord:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Helen:
I'm not Arminian...

Helen, you will have to forgive me here, this is apparently one of those times when I don't know if you are joking or not.

You deny that God has the final say in salvation. You believe man is sovereign and God only tries to give men the best possible chance of being saved.

By the definition of everyone but you, that is Arminian. So, you are Arminian, unless of course you were joking.</font>[/QUOTE]oh help....

1. God's sovereignty is not threatened or depleted in the least by the fact that He has allowed man freedom to respond to Him.

2. I am not Arminian. Period.

3. I have simply put the references Paul used into the context well-known by those to whom he was writing -- the Scriptural context. You refuse that; that is up to you. The Bible remains as it is.

 

[Daniel David]

Originally posted by Helen:

oh help....

1. God's sovereignty is not threatened or depleted in the least by the fact that He has allowed man freedom to respond to Him.

2. I am not Arminian. Period.

3. I have simply put the references Paul used into the context well-known by those to whom he was writing -- the Scriptural context. You refuse that; that is up to you. The Bible remains as it is.

1. Since I was a little boy, I wanted to fly. I loved Superman. That was so neat to me. I willed to fly a thousand times. I have yet to get above a few feet.

God has sovereignly determined that I cannot fly. I must accept my nature for what it is.

Before I was saved, my nature opposed God and could not obey his law and never wanted anything to do with him. In fact, the Scripture says I was an enemy of God. If I had freedom the way you define it, I could fly.

You are trying to say that inspite of all that, people will still choose God.

2. You say you are not an Arminian. You just believe exactly the same as Arminians. Either God is sovereign or man is. Calvinists say that God is.

3. Explain to me what Romans 9:16 means. That was Paul's summary of his use of Isaac/Ishmael and Jacob/Esau. You deal with the whole context of Romans 9 or this discussion will not go anywhere. You are trying to remove the verse from context so you can prove it means something it doesn't. I will not sit by and watch you do it.

 

[Helen]

Preach, my point has been made. Your point has been made. I think we have different definitions of sovereignty. God is sovereign. I do not see sovereignty demanding the creation of robots instead of thinking, reasoning humans. You seem to.

I also know that salvation cannot be lost. That alone marks me as apart from the Arminians.

I'm not interested in scrapping with you, I'm sorry. I'm interested in what the Bible has to say.

As far as the Superman thing -- you were always free to want, weren't you?

That has been my point all along. There is nothing in your nature which would allow you to fly. Yet you wanted to anyway.

That is the sum total of my point regarding Calvinistic lack of the freedom to want in the first place. You have presented a perfectly adequate example of what I was talking about. Your freedom to want never denied your own nature or God's sovereignty. Neither does anyone else's.

As for Romans 9:16, there is nothing any of us can do to earn or keep or help with our salvation. I have said that so many times I think my keyboard could type it by itself now. However we can accept or refuse it by way of believing in Jesus Christ or not. That is the gospel message.

Salvation never depended on man's desire. It was accomplished apart from man's desire. But, having been accomplished, man can certainly desire it. That does not take away from the fact that God supplied it and offers it totally out of mercy and compassion and not due to anything in any of us.

That's enough now for me. I have stated what I wanted to state. You have consistently misrepresented me, but I think that can be seen by at least most of the people reading this. Barry and I are heading out for the afternoon to catch up on some shopping before my surgery Monday.

I'll be checking in this evening. Probably not to this thread, though...

 

[Daniel David]

Helen, the superman example was given to prove you do not have "freedom" beyond your nature.

The Scripture says that lost people do not want salvation, God, repentance, Christ, or his sacrifice.

You must include the totality of Scripture in your arguments. Otherwise, it demonstrates a lack of thinking through these issues.

I tried...

 

[Aaron]

Corroboration is a critical element in establishing the reliability of one's testimony. That is why I wondered if any other recognized authority shared Helen's views about Esau.

I am also concerned about the use of apocryphal literature and Jewish fables as evidence. This is something we are commanded as Christians not to give heed to, Titus 1:14. Paul said these things "turn us from the truth." So I'm afraid that the dubious account from the supposed book of Jasher is disqualified from any serious consideration.

Hebrews gives us the reason Esau despised his birthright. He despised it to satisfy the lusts of his flesh.

Looking diligently...Lest there be any fornicator, or profane person, as Esau, who for one morsel of meat sold his birthright. For ye know how that afterward, when he would have inherited the blessing, he was rejected: for he found no place of repentance, though he sought it carefully with tears.

His exclamation that "I am about to die," is merely the rash hyperbole of a profane person.

But regardless of whether one can point to this cause for that effect or not is irrelevant. God did it, and he did it that the His purposes according to election might stand.

Now that says to me that it was not because of the good or ill in either one.

What do you say, PTW?

 

[Daniel David]

Aaron, great points. I think what some people miss is that Paul said the purpose of God would stand before either child did right or wrong. Therefore, election proceeds even the actions that people say would warrant rejection by God. God rejected Esau before he was ever created. That is what Paul said.

Aaron, have you ever wondered how some people have peace when God's sovereignty is denied?

 

[Aaron]

Unless we confess that whatever calamity meets us was brought upon us by the Shepherd and Bishop of our souls for our good, our only response will be bitterness and disillusionment.