Decisional Regeneration Take 2

[ReformedBaptist]

Unfortunately the context as well as the consistancy of context speaks (IMO) to the contrary, especially in light of verse 8 which identifies who 'the seed' is referring to:

Decendants = seed.

Allen, think about this. Although the particular text in question does not tell us of what I have written concerning the seed, and not seeds as of many, the SAME apostle tells us so in Galatians. Now this is good biblical interpretation, interpreting Scripture by Scripture. You cannot ignore that the promise that all the families of the earth will be blessed through their seed is Christ and is the preaching of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. It is good biblical interpretation to bring the revelation of God from Galatians to this text.

The very verses BEFORE (in 4, 5) speak of the Purpose God has for Israel from His Word to the Coming Messiah. The verse 1-3 speak of Israel from the very beginning in the National sense. Context

Verse 7 explains that not all of Abrahams children (children of the flesh) are children of God because Abrahams FIRST son was Ishmael, but God declared that it was not through Ishmael (through whom the promise SHOULD or Normally had come through) but IN Issac shall thy seed (children of Promise) be called:

'The Seed' Christ paralles 'the seed' from Issac. How? Just as the people of God (in a nationalistic sense) will come from the son of promise, so to will the Son of Promise bring forth a People (in the Salvic sence). Both are both with the purpose of bringing forth a people of and unto God.

Also chapters 9-11 of Romans is about Israel (past, present future) and the Gentiles (present and future)
Ch 9 is about Israels History
Ch 10 is about Israls present situation of being set aside for the Gentiles
Ch 11 is about both the Gentiles and Israels future.

Note that contextually this is true as you read them. To begin dicing it up to pre-formulated thoughts makes the reading of Romans jumpy and disoriented.

Both the seed (Christ) and the heirs of the promises (descendents) are in view. Salvation is indeed of the Jews, but one is not a Jew who is one inwardly, but of the Spirit. The children of faith in Jesus Christ are counted as the seed, and THEY are the Israel of God. I thought this was fundamental to Christian understanding. Is dispensationalism affecting your interpretation of these Scriptures? I approach them covenantally.

It is not saying THEY are the children of God because of blood line. They were chosen BY God to fulfil and bring about His purpose. Verses 4 and 5 establish the promises it is speaking of.

Remember the purpose (in context) is about choosing 'whom' He will/desires to bring about His purposed plan in bringing forth Him a people (His Chosen Nation [Israel] ), His written Word (Pentateuch), and a living Savior.

SIDE NOTE:
There are those who Calvinists I have run into who feel this chapter is dealing with both Groups and Individuals. However if it did deal with both group and individaul, we have the scriptures flip/flopping around like a fish. In one instance you have group, then individuals, then group, - oops - no that should be individuals, and then back to group.
OK BACK AGIAN -

The context is set, and the imagry is ALREADY established as the individuals are representives of their Peoples and this is from the beginning of the chapter and continues on through. Romans 9 Deals with Israels Past, Romans 10 is Israels present (during that Time period) and Gentiles (us), and Romans 11 deals with Israels future and with us and Israel together.

Just compare what I showed to the scripture and see if it does not bear out what I stated. That is all. I know you have another view, but if you do not seriously look at a view OUTSIDE your own theological frame work - HOW my friend, will you be able to see what they are saying until you take of first the glasses you placed on yourself to see no other way but that one??
Is that not the marks of a teachable spirit?

Notice I didn't say put away your understanding and follow blindly. But how will one see unless they have a teachable heart? That means TO ME - I must not use my theology to as the test of truth or error but the scritpure being presented in context of itself FIRST.

This is a very odd reasoning Allen. If one believes their “theology” is from the Scripture, why would they put it off to know theology? Odd indeed. Must I put off my knowledge that Jesus is the Son of God to know Jesus is the Son of God? Maybe I am misunderstanding you. Methinks a thread about what biblical theology is should be made, lest we be counted as being anti-theological while all the time theologizing.

I personally believe that though theology is great and helps us become established, but we sometimes make our theology the Word and lean on it more so than the True Word. (not that I'm claiming this of you - just in general) So when others ask us to see what they are saying, our first responce is pre-conditioned to our theological constructs and not always exigetical to the scripture. IMO of course.

Technically it does not matter what I think the scripture says but what the scripture in context and according to its content is saying. In Romans 9 it IS speaking to the whole and NOT individuals, especially when you follow the consistant imagry set forth by Paul. Now if you do not GO BACK (to the OT) and look up what was actaully said and therefore the context in which Paul is using it (via the Holy Ghost who wrote both Testaments) you can make it say whatever you would like.

We know we do not what to make the text say what we want it to say. My understanding of the doctrine of election and predestination did not rise out of theology, but from Scripture. For me, it BEGAN with the OT as interpreted by the NT, not the other way around.

Rather than continue this one point of disagreement here, let’s start a new thread concerning Romans 9, groups, individuals, et.

But I showed where it is speaking expressly of Nations and but another example is the use of Moses since some say He could not be seen in as regarding a Nation. Lets take the dispute back to Ex 33 and get the context of

Just a hint though, Israel got caught in Idolatry (golden calf) and God threatened to consume them if they did not put the ornaments of Idolatry away. God was so mad in fact that He threatened Moses with this:


That set Moses up right I bet after all he went through. Kill everyone and start all over with Moses. But God had mercy and Chapter 33 speaks to the mercy BEING TOWARD A NATION. That is the context. But don't take my word - I'm an idiot most times.
Let God be true and Allan a liar - That is the motto I use in my Bible Study Classes and Preaching.

It is not about salvaiton but about God electing a Nation for/to His purpose. That is what the scripture shows in context NOT eternal salvation of which (I agree would and MUST) deal specifically with individuals.

One would love to see how you may have a nation that is not made up of individuals.

 

[ReformedBaptist]

Good point an glad you brought it up, brother.

First, I never stated salvation is not talked about at all, I stated it was not the context of the afore mentioned verses.


Remember, as I stated in a previous post - this in concerning Differing Nations or groups of People. Just as Moses represented Israel and Pharoah, Egypt. It was speaking of God choosing a people and passing over others.

Then vs 19 - Why does God fault, who can resist His will?
Fault with what?
We see previously that God used Pharoah to show forth His power that His name might be proclaim in all the earth. How will that Happen? By Israel leaving there in Power of God and conquering other great Nations in the Power of God. We know this is what happened according to the OT.

So the question is phrased from those whom God used to show forth His power and who His chosen People were. Remember Paul is giving an historical account thus far.
God, why do you find fault - Not individually but against a People. WHo resists His will or purpose.
IOW- Why harden us and then judge us for the sake of your glory, who can go against your purpose or will.

In essense God is stating the Pagan world understood that if God wanted to do something there was nothing that could stop God (unless it be another God - but WE know better ) So why do WHAT He did the WAY He did it?

Answer:

Oh man, who are you to question God? Shall that which is made say to the potter "why did you make me like this".

First - Again remember this is refering to a Nation or group of people not individuals.
The "man" spoken of, depending on context CAN mean single person, OR mankind in the plural form. Since scripture is speaking in a National or group sense it is used in the plural to be "mankind"; something distinct from God.

Why did you make me like this?
Much like Pharoah the representitive of Egypt who was 'raised up' or allowed to come into being (with God KNOWING what they would choose to do and be), we see them questioning God for making them KNOWING the way they are, and not in a way they would have choosen so they could be used of God to in a positive sense. And in God doing so, they complain He still finds fault with them doing just what He knew they would.
However, It's not about salvation but how they are used for Gods purposes to establish and bring forth His plan into being.
(remember earlier, in the national sense, [it is] not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy) And that is the answer God replies back.


Can the Potter not make the vessels in line with His choosing, to be used for His purpose. One unto Honor (Chosen By God for His purpose - Israel) and another to dishonor (rejected by God for His purpose - all others being the Gentile World). Note the vessels HERE are in the singlar.



The Gods plan is more than a one moment thing as Paul speaks to "if God endured" (carried along) with great patience the vessels of wrath fitted (completely worthy or made worthy) to destruction.
Here is a very odd thing. God carries these rebellious people along (allows them to be) until they are have completely rendered themselves absolutely and completely worthy of destruction. He made them knowing what they WILL do but God "raised them up" for a purpose as well - Just as He will show forth His glory in Israel, He will do the same in them.
This played out in the next verse:



Now the temporal sense is in view but that doesn't negate the eternal which is implied in both cases regarding God glorifying Himself in both vessels. But again here it's not salvation but speaking specifically to the purpose of God concerning Israel. We see this is STILL the view as we continue.



Now taken by itself, you would almost have a case. However verse 23 and 24 are actually ONE Sentence. So let us place them together and see what it states more plainly:
Rom 9:23 & 24 -


Now WHO is the "us" in this portion?
It's the vessels of mercy as stated consistantly above, is Israel. Paul is speaking as a Jew NOT a Christian and you see that in the context. "even us (Israel) whom He called, NOT THE JEWS ONLY but the Gentiles. This calling still has to do with Israel as a Nation in the past NOT present. We KNOW in the OT that God called to the gentiles also.ie. Ninivah, Babylon and others. Scripture even states in the later times Egypt will be one of Gods people.
Anyway as we keep going you see this is still in a national sense of God dealing with the Nation. Look and see:



The prophesy:



Who are those NOT His People in the Prophesy here; Look:


Also reference by God is the wife issue:



This is without a doubt about Israel in a National sense and NOT NT believers.

Let's address the issue of Nations/individuals in another thread. Reason being is that it is driving your understanding of all the verses. i.e. its your theology. lol

 

[Allan]

Let's address the issue of Nations/individuals in another thread. Reason being is that it is driving your understanding of all the verses. i.e. its your theology. lol

I agree it would better to be done in another thread. However, you (though maybe not your intent) seem to think I take Romans 9 based on a theological view or that I studied some type of theology to come to this distinction and not context of scripture itself. The whole purpose I set forth for you what I did, was not to convince you of what Romans 9 IS but that what I see according to the content within the established context.

I know it is different from the Reformed view of Romans 9 but I found later in life it is actually a well known view of Romans 9 just as the Election for Salvation view is according to the Reformed Tradition.

However, both groups agree Romans 9 is speaking of God Sovereign right to chose what He will, it is just the two groups see His chosing in different things

To be honest before I even heard of the theological sides, I was going verse by verse throught the book of Romans and this is the gist of what I found then and still affirn (thus far ) based upon what "I" have found. (even after studying Calvinistic views later on)