• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Are the five points Biblical or man made?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Jarthur001

Active Member
:rolleyes:

I haven't changed my position a single time. Solid food is not given to infants. Unless you think "solid food" isn't spiritual (which would be wrong), you will have to agree with me.

Hello Bob,

It seems that you are trying once again to make an argument that this passage is speaking of spiritual infants. The idea in a debate is to pick a side and stick to it. One can't keep jumping back and forth.

Once and for all....is your view that this passage is addressing spiritual infants or not?
 

Jarthur001

Active Member
For those who would like to discuss Romans, I offer my preliminary outline of Romans 9 for future reference.

I. True Nature of God's Israel
A. True desc. = not children of flesh, but children of "promise"
1. "True" are named through Isaac (a child of promise)
2. "Same with Rebecca" (who had a child of promise)
a. God's election was of "Jacob" (another of child of promise)
i. His election of Jacob does not make God unjust
ii. His election of Jacob is based upon His mercy/compassion
Compare Pharaoh (mercy/hardening)
B. Why does God blame "fleshly" Israel if He chose this "true" Israel?
1. How does "man" argue with God's choice?
2. What if God endured in order to make His glory known?
a. As Hosea says ... (Jew/Gentile issue)
b. And as Isaiah cries out ... (Jew/Gentile issue)
C. What can be said? Gentiles did obey; Israel stumbled!
1. As it was written ...
2. Paul's desire that some of them believe.


In this structure, note how the illustrations are embedded within a context-specific issue: THE ISRAEL OF GOD!

Paul's opposition argues that if Paul is right, "God's word has failed!" (9:6) What are they arguing about? Are they arguing that God's word has failed if He picked one individual person to be saved and not another? What kind of sense would that make? Certainly they must have in mind a particular "promise" or "word"? Or are they just pulling that comment out of a hat!?


(Note to dispensationalists: I can adapt the structure to your theology as well. No offence intended :) )

Thanks Bob...

Maybe you should start a new thread and teach us your views on Romans 9


James
 

BaptistBob

New Member
Hello Bob,

It seems that you are trying once again to make an argument that this passage is speaking of spiritual infants. The idea in a debate is to pick a side and stick to it. One can't keep jumping back and forth.

Once and for all....is your view that this passage is addressing spiritual infants or not?


I haven't changed my position a single time. If you think so, then show me where I did so. In fact, if you are so confident, then get someone else on the planet to agree with your point about what I have said.

Prove it or lose it. Where's the evidence? Show me or be ignored by me and everyone else who wants to have a serious, adult discussion.
 

Jarthur001

Active Member
I haven't changed my position a single time. If you think so, then show me where I did so. In fact, if you are so confident, then get someone else on the planet to agree with your point about what I have said.

Prove it or lose it. Where's the evidence? Show me or be ignored by me and everyone else who wants to have a serious, adult discussion.

Once and for all....is your view that this passage is addressing spiritual infants or not?
 

Jarthur001

Active Member

That one says...

"A message for the mature cannot be delivered to infants in Christ."

When I called you on it...


POST 269....
hold on....


You think that the rulers are the infants???????

Sorry..I must laugh at your folly.....dude

Paul is clear on this

You said...."Dude, no! "

POST 270

I went on to say...
The rulers are not the Babies
POST 271

then you turn again.....

Who knows what you believe?? :laugh:

At any rate...either way it does not work bob. :wavey:
 

BaptistBob

New Member
That one says...

"A message for the mature cannot be delivered to infants in Christ."

When I called you on it...


POST 269....


You said...."Dude, no! "

POST 270

I went on to say...

POST 271

then you turn again.....

Who knows what you believe?? :laugh:

At any rate...either way it does not work bob. :wavey:


I have NEVER said that rulers are infants in Christ. Show us where I have said otherwise if you want to be taken seriously. Everyone is waiting to see it. EVERYONE!

Your ability to produce the evidence will affect how seriously members of this forum take what you say. If you say I "turned again" after post 271, then you had better be able to prove it. Otherwise, everyone -- even those who oppose me -- will think you have issues.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Jarthur001

Active Member
I have NEVER said that rulers are infants in Christ. Show us where I have said otherwise if you want to be taken seriously. Everyone is waiting to see it. EVERYONE!

Your ability to produce the evidence will affect how seriously members of this forum take what you say.

post 266

Are they mere infants in Christ? Sometimes, I suppose.

And the fact that YOU say this is talking about infants in Christ. You said it many times.

and the passages contrast the two wisdoms...
.....1)
We do, however, speak a message of wisdom among the mature,

.....2)but not the wisdom of this age or of the rulers of this age,
 

Jarthur001

Active Member
I have NEVER said that rulers are infants in Christ. Show us where I have said otherwise if you want to be taken seriously. Everyone is waiting to see it. EVERYONE!

Your ability to produce the evidence will affect how seriously members of this forum take what you say. If you say I "turned again" after post 271, then you had better be able to prove it. Otherwise, everyone -- even those who oppose me -- will think you have issues.

:applause::applause::applause::applause:
 

BaptistBob

New Member
post 266



And the fact that YOU say this is talking about infants in Christ. You said it many times.

and the passages contrast the two wisdoms...
.....1)
We do, however, speak a message of wisdom among the mature,

.....2)but not the wisdom of this age or of the rulers of this age,

Wow, how confused can you get?? You quote me out of context. YOU asked me if pastors of Baptist churches are infants in Christ, and I replied that perhaps sometimes they are. No one in this form disagrees that somewhere there are immature pastors, so there is no controversy there.

However, you have, for some odd reason, taken my comment out of context and applied it to earthy rulers? Why did you do that if you asked me about pastors at Baptist churches? Only you and God know the answer to that.


Again, do you have any evidence showing that I said that rulers are infants in Christ? I'm still waiting.
 

BaptistBob

New Member
We do, however, speak a message of wisdom among the mature,

.....2)but not the wisdom of this age or of the rulers of this age,

The Corinthians value worldly wisdom, just like worldly people do. But the message Paul wants to share with them is "not the wisdom of this age." It is a message for the MATURE.


Brothers, I could not address you as spiritual but as worldly—mere infants in Christ. I gave you milk, not solid food, for you were not yet ready for it. Indeed, you are still not ready.
 

Jarthur001

Active Member
Wow, how confused can you get?? You quote me out of context. YOU asked me if pastors of Baptist churches are infants in Christ, and I replied that perhaps sometimes they are. No one in this form disagrees that somewhere there are immature pastors, so there is no controversy there.

However, you have, for some odd reason, taken my comment out of context and applied it to earthy rulers? Why did you do that if you asked me about pastors at Baptist churches? Only you and God know the answer to that.


Again, do you have any evidence showing that I said that rulers are infants in Christ? I'm still waiting.

I gave it..in full context of the subject.

But if we can't get beyond this, we will never get to the point. What you said in the past does not matter.

Lets be clear before we move on. You see this is speaking to two classes.....

what are those two classes?


I will tell you my view...

class one...the believer.

class two....the non-believer.

Now give a simply reply just as I have and then we can make our points.
 

BaptistBob

New Member
I gave it..in full context of the subject.

No you did not. You asked me about pastors, not rulers. Here is the post, for EVERYONE to see.

http://baptistboard.com/showpost.php?p=1424644&postcount=266


But if we can't get beyond this, we will never get to the point. What you said in the past does not matter.

You've been harping on it for two days now. It's time to face up to what you have said. Be a man!

Lets be clear before we move on. You see this is speaking to two classes.....

what are those two classes?


I will tell you my view...

class one...the believer.

class two....the non-believer.

Now give a simply reply just as I have and then we can make our points.


Paul says there are the mature and the immature in Christ. The immature value the wisdom of this world, just like unbelievers do. The immature are enamored of the wisdom of this world and live like natural men, unable to understand the message for the mature.

Indeed, you are still not ready.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Jarthur001

Active Member
Paul says there are the mature and the immature in Christ.. The immature value the wisdom of this world, just like unbelievers do. The immature are enamored of the wisdom of this world and live like natural men, unable to understand the message for the mature.

So are the immature...believers or non-believers?
 

BaptistBob

New Member
So are the immature...believers or non-believers?

Wait just one second. There is no way we are going to continue this conversation until you face up to your responsibilities. You have repeatedly made false accusations, and even ignored the content of the links I gave. You must face your responsibilty, now, for this converstation to continue.


(As for your question above, it has been answered clearly enough that everyone who has not plucked out their eyes already understands it.)

Respond to everything I said in the post linked immediately below, or be ignored.

http://baptistboard.com/showpost.php?p=1424931&postcount=293
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Jarthur001

Active Member
Wait just one second. There is no way we are going to continue this conversation until you face up to your responsibilities. You have repeatedly made false accusations, and even ignored the content of the links I gave. You must face your responsibilty, now, for this converstation to continue.


(As for your question above, it has been answered clearly enough that everyone who has not plucked out their eyes already understands it.)
You are acting like a kid bob...grow up.

If you MUST...I will repost...

I said...

Verse 6 says...
although it is not a wisdom of this age or of the rulers of this age, who are doomed to pass away.

This wisdom of the age is earthly wisdom. Its not from above. The wisdom of the age will change just as the age changes...it will pass away.

What type of wisdom then is Paul talking about?

Verse 7...
7 But we impart a secret and hidden wisdom of God, which God decreed before the ages for our glory.


This wisdom comes from God and is hidden. This wisdom is also secret. It is hidden from who?

verse 8...
None of the rulers of this age understood this...

Gods wisdom is hidden from the BELIEVERS RULERS??????

If we were to believe as you wish us to believe...this is saying Gods wisdom is hidden from the pastors of our churches. They are the believers leaders/rulers. Or...from Christ himself, for He is the head of the Church.

NOW....this is when you replied...
Originally Posted by Jarthur001 View Post
If we were to believe as you wish us to believe...this is saying Gods wisdom is hidden from the pastors of our churches.
Are they mere infants in Christ? Sometimes, I suppose.

I'm not asking you to say I'm sorry. Just drop it and act like a man...move on.

>>>>>So are the immature...believers or non-believers?<<<<
 

BaptistBob

New Member
NOW....this is when you replied...

No, I did not reply to that with that comment. The reply is to the quote of you concerning pastors.

The following words are yours, and they are the ones I was replying to: "If we were to believe as you wish us to believe...this is saying Gods wisdom is hidden from the pastors of our churches."


The point being, that the immature are not ready for the message to the mature.
 

Jarthur001

Active Member
No, I did not reply to that with that comment. The reply is to the quote of you concerning pastors.

The following words are yours, and they are the ones I was replying to: "If we were to believe as you wish us to believe...this is saying Gods wisdom is hidden from the pastors of our churches."


The point being, that the immature are not ready for the message to the mature.

Bob, 265 266

Never mind. I'm done here.

peace

James
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Me4Him

New Member
Ill attempt to have a discussion here, although I may not fully understand your points as we think differently. So bear with me please... :)

Id say the law serves some purposes and two things I'd throw out are yes we are to abide by it, but through free willingness rather than works as it itself reveals our sinfulness and we see that it is glorious rather than tedious..

The Law is possible for one (Jesus/God) but impossible for all as it reveals condemnation and helplessness on our part. Esau and Pharaoh will be judged as all are, by the Law which we all have neglected wholeheartedly at some point and sadly still do as we throw ourselves on the throne of grace.

What's the point in giving the law if predestination isn't going to allow man to be Judged by the law???

It's through the law we know we're sinner, plus we know how to avoid the consequences through Faith in Jesus,

It's this "knowledge of Good/evil" that we're held accountable for the "CHOICE" we make between them.



If you interpret it as foreknowledge of Esau then you are violating 9:11, it clearly states this calling was made before he had made any choices and had not been born.

God can not/will not condemn someone who hasn't violated the law, the law it's self won't allow it,

The only way God could speak of Esau before he was born is through "foreknowledge", else the law, principles of law would be "NULLIFIED".



I think He is clearly dealing with the sovereign will of God and it is not based on human will or exertion vs 16.

Many have the "will" to enter heaven, but like the song "I surrender all" haven't surrender all, God only "CHOSES" to saved those who have "surrender all",

Israel believed they were predestine because of Abraham, which is the context of Ro 9, but Paul made it clear that God wasn't obligated to save them just because they were Abraham's descendants,

God was "FREE" to chose whom he will saved, "BUT" they would only be saved "IF" they met God's/laws requirements, that is "Faith in Jesus".

Israel was still trying to obtain righteousness through obedience to the law.




God hardened Pharaoh for His purpose for him, and yes your right Pharaoh was on his way to hell as everyone else is at some point. Your 2 Timothy verse is awesome, yes anyone who truly sets their hearts on Gods ways will be blessed, but again Paul is speaking of the deeper- why did a blind and wicked person to the core decide to set his/her heart on God? because God poured out His grace on them, and not because of anything they did.

Try explaining the harding of Pharaod in context with scripture that says,

Not the Lord's will for "ANY" to perish, and "ALL" should come to repentance,

Jesus dying for the sins of the whole world that the "whole world"...MIGHT BE" saved.

and the Spirit "STRIVING" with man.

If no one is "without an excuse" on Judgement day, can they say,

"God, you never made salvation available to me".



the greater being God's grace in the calling

God only "calls", he doesn't "force" anyone to accept/reject the calling, that is "OUR CHOICE", Jesus proved that with Israel.




As far as saying Calvinism being a one verse or one chapter doctrine, that is very untrue. It is drawn from the entirety of Scripture and has hundreds of of in context Scripture referances. It is not just some made up doctrine based on a few verses, but has been carried along though the Baptist church for years up until the modern day. Our denomination highly deemed this doctrine and still holds it today in their beliefs. Calvinism is also known as the "Grace Doctrine".

I've never read anything about Calvin, all I know is what I've seen posted, "IF" that's a true representation of him/his doctrine, I'll say this:

He didn't believe in the MK or "seventh day of rest", so his "Eschatology" was wrong,

I understand he was also trained in law, which, has he correctly understood, would have never lead him to his "Soteriology" of Predestination in scripture,

When you consider all three, "Eschatology, Soteriology and Law", it "appears to me", Calvin had a hard time getting anything right.

I also wanted to note that just because our denomination holds this doctrine isn’t a reason that we should. As any doctrine it should be searched out and tested in Scripture personally and prayerfully.

Wrap it all up in not willing any perish. Jesus dying so the whole world might be saved, the free gift to as many were made sinner, Grace exceeds all sin,

you won't have room for the predestination of some to perish. :thumbs:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top