Ok. Why does He only show mercy to some?Rippon said:The much more significant question is why the Lord has shown mercy to any of us -- not why He has not shown mercy to more , or even all of us .
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!
Ok. Why does He only show mercy to some?Rippon said:The much more significant question is why the Lord has shown mercy to any of us -- not why He has not shown mercy to more , or even all of us .
I read Romans 9 to be Paul demonstrating God's grace to the Gentiles. Even though Israel was God's chosen people to whom belongs the adoption as sons and the glory and the covenants and the giving of the Law and temple service and the promises, He extended grace to the Gentiles as well. "I will call those who were not My people, My people".Rippon said:It's His prerogative . It's the Lord's sovereign right to do whatsoever He wants with anyone of His creation . He is under obligation to no one . We all deserve condemnation remember .
Romans 9;14,15 : Are we saying , then , that God was unfair ? Of course not ! For God said to Moses , "I will show mercy to anyone I choose , and I will show compassion to anyone I choose." ( NLTse )
I'm not a Calvinist. That's why we don't agree.Linda64 said:You Calvinists can't even agree with each other. I'm glad I'm not a Calvinist!
Linda64 said:You Calvinists can't even agree with each other. I'm glad I'm not a Calvinist!
When Calvinists can't even agree on "predestination" and "double predestination" then how does a non-Calvinist know which is true? Anyone who is non-Calvinist pretty much understands and agrees that "double predestination" is not biblical--that "predestination" is based on the "foreknowledge" of God. Some Calvinists follow the teachings of John Calvin, some follow the teachings of Arthur Pink, some follow James White, some follow Spurgeon, etc. This is confusing for the non-Calvinist who simply wants to follow "what saith Scripture"ReformedBaptist said:And do non-calvinists all agree in every point of doctrine?
Amy.G said:Ok. Why does He only show mercy to some?
Linda64 said:When Calvinists can't even agree on "predestination" and "double predestination" then how does a non-Calvinist know which is true? Anyone who is non-Calvinist pretty much understands and agrees that "double predestination" is not biblical--that "predestination" is based on the "foreknowledge" of God. Some Calvinists follow the teachings of John Calvin, some follow the teachings of Arthur Pink, some follow James White, some follow Spurgeon, etc. This is confusing for the non-Calvinist who simply wants to follow "what saith Scripture"
I'm not saying that non-Calvinists always agree on every point of doctrine, but when a Calvinist can't agree on one of their main teachings, it appears rather odd since they say they all follow the teachings of John Calvin (and I know some Calvinists don't follow Calvin) and his interpretation of the Scripture.
Run that one by me again---I read it three times and I still don't understand what you said--especially when you said that Paul "speculated" in Romans 9. Did Paul "speculate" anywhere else?npetreley said:This is a very profound question, and there is no simple answer. One might just as well ask why God knowingly allowed sin? I think the best we can do is speculate, as Paul did in Romans 9 (although it could be argued that Paul was not speculating but stating the truth). I've speculated elsewhere about this. For example, God cannot reveal many aspects of His character to the objects of His mercy without also having objects of wrath. God cannot have objects of wrath without sin. And so on.
Linda64 said:Run that one by me again---I read it three times and I still don't understand what you said--especially when you said that Paul "speculated" in Romans 9. Did Paul "speculate" anywhere else?![]()
Romans 9:22 What if God, wanting to show His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, 23 and that He might make known the riches of His glory on the vessels of mercy, which He had prepared beforehand for glory
“Why does He still find fault? For who has resisted His will?”
Linda64 said:When Calvinists can't even agree on "predestination" and "double predestination" then how does a non-Calvinist know which is true? Anyone who is non-Calvinist pretty much understands and agrees that "double predestination" is not biblical--that "predestination" is based on the "foreknowledge" of God. Some Calvinists follow the teachings of John Calvin, some follow the teachings of Arthur Pink, some follow James White, some follow Spurgeon, etc. This is confusing for the non-Calvinist who simply wants to follow "what saith Scripture"
I'm not saying that non-Calvinists always agree on every point of doctrine, but when a Calvinist can't agree on one of their main teachings, it appears rather odd since they say they all follow the teachings of John Calvin (and I know some Calvinists don't follow Calvin) and his interpretation of the Scripture.
Then why call yourself a Calvinist or Reformed--why not just call yourself a born again, blood-washed Christian--or a Biblicist?ReformedBaptist said:Linda,
Please provide a calvinist that says that their convinction concerning the doctrines of grace means they are following the teaching of John Calvin, as though it sprung from him. We really have dealt with this many, many times. Why keep rehearsing a false charge against us?
Do you go to church? Do you listen to your pastor preach and expound the Scriptures? Do you follow your pastor? No. You follow the Lord Jesus Christ and His teaching. Your pastor(s) is God's gift to your church as a teacher. God has gifted His church many such gifts in the men you mentioned here, and others still.
In the same way, just because I happen to agree with John Calvin on certain doctrines doesn't mean I am following him.
Linda64 said:Then why call yourself a Calvinist or Reformed--why not just call yourself a born again, blood-washed Christian--or a Biblicist?
Linda64 said:Then why call yourself a Calvinist or Reformed--why not just call yourself a born again, blood-washed Christian--or a Biblicist?
How have you not proved it? You have not proved it because you answer with non-answers such as these. Your refusal to give a concrete answer to the question of the difference between God's sovereignty and His absolute sovereignty shows that you have not really thought through the language that you are using. You are seems to be parroting words without understanding them.An adjective. :laugh:
And, how I have not proved it?
swaimj said:ReformedBaptist responded to me thusly:
How have you not proved it? You have not proved it because you answer with non-answers such as these. Your refusal to give a concrete answer to the question of the difference between God's sovereignty and His absolute sovereignty shows that you have not really thought through the language that you are using. You are seems to be parroting words without understanding them.