The Objector in Romans 9 is an Arminian

[Skandelon]

Again, New Testament epistles were read by the Pastor to the congregations and so there would be LISTENERS but not plural readers.

Again, that is beside the point as the use of a diatribe argument wouldn't affect the manner it which it was presented to the congregation. It only speaks to the intent of the author.

Indeed, there is NOTHING in Romans 9-11 that even remotely hint that the Diatribe represents LOST or HARDENED Jews - nothing - EXCEPT a theological bias.

Well, we know that Paul goes on to speak of the Jews who have stumbled, been cut off and are being hardened as in comparison to the Gentiles who are believing and being grafted in. (Rm. 9:32-11:32), but if you don't think Paul might be expressing that one of those hardened/cut off people might actually object in this manner, I guess you can keep thinking that...

Why would a Gentile, who is being grafted in, shown mercy and believing bring this objection? Clearly, Paul is anticipating this objection from the general individual Jew who God has cut off and hardened...if you can't see that then what else can I say?

 

[convicted1]

The Jews, leading up to the crucifixion, screamed, "let His blood be upon us and our children". Looks like the Jews are being condemned because of what their forefathers said.

 

[The Biblicist]

Again, that is beside the point as the use of a diatribe argument wouldn't affect the manner it which it was presented to the congregation. It only speaks to the intent of the author.

That is my point! The intent of the author is affected by whom he is addressing the letter unto. He is not addressing the letter to hardened Jews but to born again Jews and Gentiles. Hence, he would not expect any hardened Jew to be in the assemblies or audiance listening to the letter being read. In addition, the preceding context (Rom. 8:28-39) would naturally bring up this very issue among those SAVED Jews in the audiance as they were raised in Judaism and the promise of Abraham. So this would be a ligitimate issue to be addressed because of the SAVED JEWISH AUDIANCE within these assemblies. He NEVER directly addesses such hardened Jews in Romans 9-11.

Well, we know that Paul goes on to speak of

He speaks "of" a lot of issues and things throughout the epistle but never directly addresses such Jews. There is no more basis to suggest he is addressing hardened Jews in Romans 9-11 any more than he is addressing hardened Jews in Romans 14-15.

the Jews who have stumbled, been cut off and are being hardened

Romans 11 is about the NATION of Israel not about individual "Jews." What has been cut off in Romans 11 is the NATION of Israel not individual Jews. This is a NATIONAL hardening of Israel not about individual hardening of Jews.

Of course I realize that the NATION is made up of individual Jews but Paul is making a clear distinction between what is cut of and what is not cut off in regard to Israel in Romans 11 and most significantly this hardening has been a generational truth from the time of Elijah - Romans 11:1-8 - whereas, there has always been a "remnant" in every generation that were of the "elect" (Rom. 11:5-7).

Why would a Gentile, who is being grafted in, shown mercy and believing bring this objection? Clearly, Paul is anticipating this objection from the general individual Jew who God has cut off and hardened...if you can't see that then what else can I say?

However, that is not the only option! There are SAVED JEWS within this mix and so we are not forced to choose between "a Gentile, who is being grafted in, shown mercy and believing" and the "general indivdiual Jew who God has cut off and hardened" as the SAVED JEW would be very interested in the Abrahamic promise to the NATION of Israel and among them there may be much controversy over this subject.

 

[Skandelon]

He is not addressing the letter to hardened Jews but to born again Jews and Gentiles.

Ok, last time...seriously I can't keep saying the same thing over and over. I'm not upset or anything, but one of us has to step off the merry-go-round eventually.

I agreed a long time ago that the letter is addressed to all types everywhere. I mean we, Gentiles in North America, are reading it two thousand years later. I have never taken any issue with that. But that is not what a diatribe is about. It is about an author anticipating an objection from one of his readers and in this case that objector would most likely be one of the stumbling Jews, who is being hardened and cut off...which Paul references a few dozen times over the next several passages...

I can't say it any more clear than that and now I will step off...

Enjoy the ride, got to run.

 

[The Biblicist]

I agreed a long time ago that the letter is addressed to all types everywhere.

That is simply factually wrong and can be shown to be wrong by simply examining to whom Paul explicitly says this letter is addressed unto.

Rom. 1:7 To all that be in Rome, beloved of God, called to be saints:

The "all" are carefully defined. First they are "all that BE IN ROME." That is their time and geographical location. Second they are all that be in Rome who are "beloved of God" and third "called to be saints" which separates them from all others in Rome.

But that is not what a diatribe is about. It is about an author anticipating an objection from one of his readers

Again, it is not readers" but LISTENERS. Again, their is another alternative that fits the addresees - SAVED JEWS who want to know about the promise of Abraham to Israel and how this fits Israel being cut off.

 

[Yeshua1]

That is simply factually wrong and can be shown to be wrong by simply examining to whom Paul explicitly says this letter is addressed unto.

Rom. 1:7 To all that be in Rome, beloved of God, called to be saints:

The "all" are carefully defined. First they are "all that BE IN ROME." That is their time and geographical location. Second they are all that be in Rome who are "beloved of God" and third "called to be saints" which separates them from all others in Rome.



Again, it is not readers" but LISTENERS. Again, their is another alternative that fits the addresees - SAVED JEWS who want to know about the promise of Abraham to Israel and how this fits Israel being cut off.

Weren't there BOTH saved jews/Gentiles in Roman church assembly, so paul wrote to allow both of them see where they would fit into the plans of God now under New Covenant times?

 

[Doubting Thomas]

The objector to the Calvinistic interpretation of Romans 9 may be an "Arminian," but the actual objector to Paul was a Hardened Jew who God had 'held out his hands to all day long' with 'great long-suffering' but who is now being used for the ignoble purpose of being blinded in his rebellion so as to bring redemption to the world.

Yep--nailed it. :thumbs: (This is actually clear from the context; particularly all of chapters 9 through 11--indeed the whole epistle)

 

[Yeshua1]

Yep--nailed it. :thumbs: (This is actually clear from the context; particularly all of chapters 9 through 11--indeed the whole epistle)

God was dterming to use their willful ignornace, but did not bring that upon them, they were doing 'as they desired!"

 

[BobRyan]

The letter is written to Jewish and Gentile Christians in the various assemblies meeting in various places in Rome (Rom. 16). It was read in the assemblies. It was not read in the synoguoge in Rome or in the Roman market place.

Just because Paul speaks about lost Jews does not mean he is addressing lost Jews or that he is responding to lost Jews. Indeed, verse 24 directly applies this to SAVED Jews and Gentiles rather than the lost.

Paul never assumes that all Christians attending a worship service and hearing a letter read - are saved. There is always a mix -- in every congregation.

This is a "Given" that is pretty much beyond dispute as far as I know.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Romans 9:15-16 the emphasis is on God HAVING mercy it does not say the much anticipated “God DOES NOT HAVE MERCY as it pleases Him”.

Rom 9
14What shall we say then? There is no injustice with God, is there? May it never be!
15For He says to Moses, “I WILL HAVE MERCY ON WHOM I HAVE MERCY, AND I WILL HAVE COMPASSION ON WHOM I HAVE COMPASSION.”
16So then it does not depend on the man who wills or the man who runs, but on God who has mercy.
[FONT=&quot]
....
[/FONT]
22What if God, although willing to demonstrate His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction?

Vs 22 God is defending his right to have mercy, patience, kindness on those who He knows by foreknowledge will not be saved. He is defending himself against the classic Calvinist complaint!

23And He did so to make known the riches of His glory upon vessels of mercy, which He prepared beforehand for glory,
24even us, whom He also called, not from among Jews only, but also from among Gentiles.


But what is "Worse" is that in 9:22 God shows that the mercy kindness compassion and long suffering of God includes "Vessels of WRATH prepared for destruction"!! – Surely God knows that not ALL will be saved – and so when He gets to those whom He knows will choose to reject the Gospel – even to them the argument is for God enduring with much patience and longsuffering.

What is missing here? – the language that would be of the form "Mercy ONLY on the FEW of Matt 7 but NO MERCY on the MANY of Matt 7".

Romans 2 is that it is the GOODNESS of God that leads to repentance and in Romans 9 it depends on God WHO DOES have Mercy! – The “Does not have mercy, DOES not call to repentance” texts – are missing from Romans 9 AND Romans 2.

The chapter did not END with 9:21 – the answer to the question above is found not ONLY in 9:15-16 but also in vs 22.

22What if God, although willing to demonstrate His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction?

Vs 22 God is defending his right to have mercy, patience, kindness on those who He knows by foreknowledge will not be saved. He is defending himself against the classic Calvinist complaint!

 

[Yeshua1]

22What if God, although willing to demonstrate His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction?

Vs 22 God is defending his right to have mercy, patience, kindness on those who He knows by foreknowledge will not be saved. He is defending himself against the classic Calvinist complaint!

How so, as paul stated that those vessals were his objects of wrath, created by HIM to fulfill their purposes, for the salke of His elect/chosen people?

Seems that God was staying sovereign, doesn't it to you?