convicted1
Guest
I know why He loves me. He sees me(my soul that is) through His Son's blood......I am clothed in His righteousness, seeing that mine was/is as filthy rags............
-
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!
Romans 9:13?
- Thread starter convicted1
- Start date
I know why He loves me. He sees me(my soul that is) through His Son's blood......I am clothed in His righteousness, seeing that mine was/is as filthy rags............
Im not a Calvinist and I would argue for the chief of sinners title any day of the week, God recieved nothing special in taking me into His embrace.
It's a bunch of baloney, because when you really press them they will shift the blame and say they were born sinners who are completely unable to do one good thing.
How can a person be sincerely sorry for their sin if they believe they were compelled by the nature God gave them at birth to sin?
This is the very excuse homosexuals use to rationalize their sin away, they claim that God made them homosexuals.
And truth be known, if total depravity is true, then homosexuals are correct and have the PERFECT EXCUSE for their sin.
So, it sounds good on the surface to tell everybody how wretched you are, but in reality they are blaming God for their depravity.
DrJamesAch
New Member
Simple explanation videos from Romans 9 http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=87036
Bluefalcon
Member
To someone who is eternal this kind of language is appropriate. If God had to wait till he saw Esau's faithlessness to know that Esau was faithless then he wouldn't be much of a god now, would he? God's purpose of election is shown in that he elects those who demonstrate faith and damns those who don't. That he did so before time began and in conjunction with his exhaustive foreknowledge is only reasonable considering that he is, after all, God.
Bluefalcon
Member
You don't mince words, do you brother? I like that about you.
salzer mtn
Well-Known Member
Why can't we take God at his own word, if he said he hates that is what he meant. We are not qualified to water the word down. The reason he hated Esau is found in the bible. That the purpose of God according to, election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth. Before anyone say's this was nation election or Esau was just to serve Jacob in a natural way look at verse 23. And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afor prepared unto glory.
Yes, election is not of works, it is of FAITH. That is what "of him that calleth" means;
Heb 11:8 By faith Abraham, when he was called to go out into a place which he should after receive for an inheritance, obeyed; and he went out, not knowing whither he went.
Those whom God knows in his foreknowledge will obey when "called" are chosen. God knew Esau would have no regard for his birthright (which was a promise), while Jacob believed the promise given to his father Isaac and desired it. This is why God chose Jacob.
Much more, actually. Surprising that one who can see in Genesis Adam's subhuman parents
can't get past the end of his nose when reading a praise of God's mercy.
and love . . . hates even the garment spotted by the flesh.
salzer, there is a danger of what is called hyper-literalization of the text. When Jesus refers to Himself as the bread of life, are we to "take God at his own word" and believe that Jesus is actually a loaf of bread? I am not trying to be cheeky or insult you. We are called to "study to show yourself approved to God". The Word of God has to be taken in context. Sometimes figures of speech are used (like hyperbole or anthropomorphism) in order to convey or stress meaning.
convicted1
Guest
To go the "foreseen faith route", to me, takes election out of God's hands and places it upon mankind, and I am not willing to go that route.
I see God electing......Jacob over Esau, Israel over the rest of the inhabitants of the earth. But, at the same time, I see people choosing.....Joshua 24:15, and even Jesus stated that Mary chose the good part, which shall not be taken away.
I am having a hard time reconciling the two, that's why I am asking this.
I think that whenever there is supposed "contradiction", it is ok to temporarily at least, place a "nevertheless" between the two dictations, so in this case it would be "God loves the world, nevertheless, he hates some, like Esau".
Paul did a similar thing in Romans 5:13-14:
KJV, bold emphasis mine
(For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law. Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come.
(For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law. Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come.
I disagree, it is God choosing whom he desires to choose for whatever condition he determines. A perfect example is shown in Judges 7;
Jud 7:2 And the LORD said unto Gideon, The people that are with thee are too many for me to give the Midianites into their hands, lest Israel vaunt themselves against me, saying, Mine own hand hath saved me.
3 Now therefore go to, proclaim in the ears of the people, saying, Whosoever is fearful and afraid, let him return and depart early from mount Gilead. And there returned of the people twenty and two thousand; and there remained ten thousand.
4 And the LORD said unto Gideon, The people are yet too many; bring them down unto the water, and I will try them for thee there: and it shall be, that of whom I say unto thee, This shall go with thee, the same shall go with thee; and of whomsoever I say unto thee, This shall not go with thee, the same shall not go.
5 So he brought down the people unto the water: and the LORD said unto Gideon, Every one that lappeth of the water with his tongue, as a dog lappeth, him shalt thou set by himself; likewise every one that boweth down upon his knees to drink.
6 And the number of them that lapped, putting their hand to their mouth, were three hundred men: but all the rest of the people bowed down upon their knees to drink water.
7 And the LORD said unto Gideon, By the three hundred men that lapped will I save you, and deliver the Midianites into thine hand: and let all the other people go every man unto his place.
Note how all the issues that are debated concerning election are covered in this passage.
#1 God says the reason he will only choose 300 men is so that Israel will not vault themselves against God saying, "mine own hand hath saved me". Isn't this the very charge made against those who believe in election by faith?
#2 God determines the conditions. Note how God told Gideon that whosoever he said shall go with Gideon shall go, and whosoever God said should not go with Gideon shall not go. God determined 100% who should be chosen, no one else.
#3 Election was conditional, those who lapped water like a dog were chosen, those who did not were rejected.
Likewise, God has already determined that those who would believe on his Son Jesus would be chosen. This condition was determined before we were born, and cannot be altered by anyone. If God did not want us to know the required condition, he did not have to tell us how to be saved, but God tells us many times to believe on Jesus and we shall be saved.
You will say, men choose themselves. Very well, the scriptures say the same thing.
Acts 2:38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.
39 For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call.
40 And with many other words did he testify and exhort, saying, Save yourselves from this untoward generation.
Peter had no problem telling these Jews to "save yourselves". That does not usurp God's plan of salvation, they must repent and believe on the Lord Jesus as God commanded.
If it was good enough for Peter, it's good enough for me, I don't care what all these Reformed/Calvinist folks think.
It seems to me that the Reformed/Calvinists go to a great deal of trouble to attempt to intimidate people from simply trusting in Jesus. This is not what is shown in scriptures.
Last edited by a moderator:
:thumbs:Exactly
IOW, God saw that Jacob was better than Esau and would do better, and chose him upon that basis.Winman said:
Having faith in God doesn't make you better than someone else, Samson was a real rascal who killed 30 men to pay off a gambling debt, deserted his wife, and visited a prostitute on a regular basis, yet he had faith in God.
Esau did not believe the promise to his father Isaac or he would have never sold his birthright. Jacob believed the promises and desired it. Doesn't make Jacob better, it is just that he believed God.
Why do you think we are told the story of Esau selling his birthright to Jacob?
You guys need to come up with some new arguments, this one is LAME.
He had faith, he believed in God's promises to his father, and therefore he desired those promises.
What can I tell you? We are saved by faith.
But believing someone does not make you good. You could be a mass murderer, a compulsive liar and thief, and yet trust your Mom when she promises to bring you cookies on her next visit.
Faith is recognizing good in someone else, it is not boasting that we are good.
DrJamesAch
New Member
[/QUOTE]
This is grossly erroneous statement.
First, you claim that election is all of God and has nothing to do with man, but then you based God's decision on the assertion "Jabob was BETTER than Esau". If God determines all things, He COULD HAVE made Esau better than Jacob. So your argument relies on the actions of Jacob to determine God's decision. A complete contradiction to your own Calvinist system of thought.
Secondly, it is equally flawed that Jacob actually DID do better. If your argument hinges on the fact that God chose Jacob, because Jacob was "better" well then what happens when Jacob FAILS:
"I have spread out my hands all the day unto a rebellious people, which walketh in a way that was not good, after their own thoughts" Isaiah 65:2
"O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!" Matthew 23:39
Oh but wait, perseverance of the saints demands that the elect WILL ENDURE to the end. So then how did the elect of God (Isaiah 45:4) FAIL TO ENDURE! How could anyone elect possible "walketh in a way that was not good, after THEIR OWN thoughts"! Unless of course, the Calvinist theology in fact, got it wrong.
Your Sovereign Grace ORB brothers can give you the answer, as well as any PB brother worth his salt.
There are NO scriptures to support God basing his election upon seeing our faith, for His choosing us first provides for us to have that required faith!