Welcome, Guest. Login or register to use the forums.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 22, 2010, 05:54:46 AM
Home Help Search Login Register
GCM Home | Bible Search | Rules | Bookstore | Support | Newsletter


+  Christian Forums
|-+  Christian Interests
| |-+  Organized Religion and Religious Movements Discussions
| | |-+  Protestantism
| | | |-+  Arminianism
| | | | |-+  Eleven (11) Reasons to Reject Libertarian Free Will.		 0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. « previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 Go Down Print
Author Topic: Eleven (11) Reasons to Reject Libertarian Free Will.  (Read 9678 times)
da525382
Guest
« Reply #120 on: February 13, 2008, 12:50:58 PM »
First of all, Dream, thank you for finally making a declarative statement of your position, I appreciate it, that's what I have been trying to get from you this entire thread.  Now turning to your post:

Quote
Da525382 has stated that Romans 9:16-20 is proof of Iresitable grace but has failed to back it up

Whoa! Hold on just one minute.  This exchange between you and I is about one issue and one issue only: the ability of the Holy Spirit to overcome any resistance to Him by man.   I remind you that I proffered that position to you after your statement that the Holy Spirit can be resisted, with which I agreed, then you asked me for scriptures to support my proposition.  I responded that I would only begin citing one scripture at a time to test your sincerity, as in all previous correspondence here with me and with others as I see it, you do not engage, you tell people to go study or to go to a corner and answer your questions first.  I told you that would not happen with me.  And, as of this post, your controlling attempt to lead me in that direction has failed, and it always will with me.  So, in summary, let's be accurate here,  I have never attempted to prove an exhaustive doctrine of Irresistable Grace with one scriptural reference from Romans.  Such a discussion would involve dozens of scriptures to prove.  I am confronting your position that the Holy Spirit can always be resisted by man.

Quote
Lets look at what the passage is really saying:

This passsage has to do with Gods dealing with Pharoah.. The question is if The salvation of Pharoah is in view in this passage or something else.. Had Da525382 taken the time to look at the questions I asked he would have seen that it is not dealing with salvation

Your condescending insult about my complete stupidity in not having the slightest idea where your endless questions are trying to lead notwithstanding, sure, it is not dealing with salvation if you discard your own sovereign election by God Himself as not saving you.  What do you think election is?  That is his engaged context, defending God' sovereign elect, the remnant chosen by grace, of which you and I and all of us are now a part.  The example of Pharoah is to show God's sovereignty in the life of any individual, his working to have mercy or to harden as He so chooses, it really is not that difficult.

Quote
Lets look at the passage: For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might show my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth. Romans 9:17

. Why was Pharaoh raised up?a. For  God to prove to Israel that it was the Lord who delivered them. Ex 6:6-7 ,10:1-2, 13:14-16
b. To show Pharaoh that God is the one and only God. Ex 9:14
c.That the Egyptians would know that he was God. Ex 7:5, 14:4,18
d. That his name might be declared throughout the whole earth. Ex 9:16 , Romans 9:17

These purposes were realized by:a. Israel  exodus 14:31
b. Pharaoh and the Egyptians   ex 14:17-18,25
c. Throughout the earth  josh 2:10-11 and 1 sam 4:7-8


Well, good for you.  And what does this have to do with the price of tea in China. You're not seriously berating Paul for using Pharoah as his example of God hardening whomever he so pleases, are you?  The very next verse after this one Paul says in summary or conclusory fashion, after having just discussed Pharoah's example, "so then", to make his point:

Quote
18So then he has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills.

Quote
Next lets look the harding of Pharoah:
Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth. Romans 9:8

a. The hardening was not towards salvation. After all in Calvinism’s system why would a totally depraved man need to be hardened? In fact verses like this contradict Calvinism’s  view of total depravity. ( see also  john 12:40) . When hardening takes place its always because the light given has been rejected. The hardening is always in reference to letting Israel go, not believing  or obeying what god said in reference to salvation. ( ex 4:21, 7:3-4 , 10:1,20,27, 14:8)

Who cares what the hardening was "towards", Dream, that is not the context of Paul here, that context is God's sovereign choices.  It is not an issue of "Calvinism", however you define it, it is a scriptural truth Paul is presenting.  He just told you the hardening (or mercy) is as God Himself chooses in verse 18, that is the conclusion he brings us to, right in the verse.  It doesn't matter what it's in reference to, it is God's own choice always, that's his very point.

Quote
b. The hardening was not permanent. This is seen in that God is not said to have hardened Pharaohs heart just once but on several occasions.  Ex 9:12,10:27, 14:

So what?

Quote
c. Pharaohs will was already set before God hardened him .  Ex 3:19

So what?

Quote
d. Pharaoh also hardened his own heart. Ex 7:13-14,22, 8:15,19,32,  9:7, 34-35

So what?  Now are you trying to lecture Paul on stating God hardened him?

Quote
e. Pharaoh hardened his own heart first. Ex 5:1, ex 7:13  it would seem also that long before any of these events had taken place that pharaoh had already rejected the light given.

So what?

Quote
f. Hardened (chazaq) can mean strengthen. Judges 3:12, 16:28 God simply made Pharaoh strong to carry out what Pharaoh already of his own will wanted to do. God did not give him a wicked desire to rebel against him. He just gave him the courage to carry out his own desire.

According to Paul, God did just the opposite of having mercy on him.  It really is not complicated to glean this from reading the passage.

Quote
g. Romans 2:5 supports the idea that man not God does the initial hardening.

So, now you are using a passage that doesn't even describe who hardens what first, this scripture does not put God in the back seat of your taxi cab, Dream, it doesn't neuter Him, and it certainly doesn't in anyway contradict Paul's characterization of God's hardening of man as He so chooses to do.

Quote
Verse 19 is obviously the key. In that verse we find the assertion that God's will cannot be resisted. But as we have already established, the question is "which part of God's will cannot be resisted?"Paul is obviously refering the reader back to the history of Pharaoh when God brought Israel out of Egypt under Moses. So, let's just ask the question. Is God drawing Pharaoh to repentence? Absolutely not. There is nothing in this passage like that. So, where in this passage do we see any indication that when God's Spirit draws us, He cannot be resisted? Nowhere!

Yours is a spin.  The use of Pharoah is to establish God's own choices, not man's.  It could not be plainer on its face.  And you drive again this argument I've answered numerous times now that yes He can be resisted, but that resistance is of no import, it can be dealt with as God so chooses, should he choose to defeat it, He will, He did so with Paul on the road to Damascus as I previously discussed, and which you simply skip over.  You go back and back to this fact that man can resist, when I have repeated told you that I agree, but that that is not the issue at all here, again, the issue is whether God can overcome that resistance whenever He so chooses.  That is the scriptural reality you reject.

Quote
The fact is he can be resisted: Acts 7:51 You stiff-necked people, with uncircumcised hearts and ears! You are just like your fathers: You always resist the Holy Spirit!

Ditto.

Quote
Romans 9:20 Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus?

Ditto. (and Amen, by the way)

Quote
Paul does not forbid us to ask questions concerning the manner of Gods election. Rather what Paul forbids us to do is complain against God.  God urges us to study the scripture to attain understanding and wisdom. 2 tim 2: 15 3:16-17  The text does not say anything about Gods unconditional election it does however say God has the ultimate say in his choice.

The complaint against God in this passage is grounded in man's own view of God's choices, pondering their unfairness, their intolerance.  Paul quite simply is reminding these people that God's choices are His own and no one else's, and that those choices are not under our scrutiny
Logged
dreamaccount2000
Member
***

Manna: 4
Offline Offline

Mood:

Posts: 478

Blog entries (0)

View Profile
« Reply #121 on: February 13, 2008, 12:55:42 PM »
Quote from: da525382 on February 13, 2008, 12:50:58 PM
First of all, Dream, thank you for finally making a declarative statement of your position, I appreciate it, that's what I have been trying to get from you this entire thread.  Now turning to your post:

Quote
Da525382 has stated that Romans 9:16-20 is proof of Iresitable grace but has failed to back it up

Whoa! Hold on just one minute.  This exchange between you and I is about one issue and one issue only: the ability of the Holy Spirit to overcome any resistance to Him by man.   I remind you that I proffered that position to you after your statement that the Holy Spirit can be resisted, with which I agreed, then you asked me for scriptures to support my proposition.  I responded that I would only begin citing one scripture at a time to test your sincerity, as in all previous correspondence here with me and with others as I see it, you do not engage, you tell people to go study or to go to a corner and answer your questions first.  I told you that would not happen with me.  And, as of this post, your controlling attempt to lead me in that direction has failed, and it always will with me.  So, in summary, let's be accurate here,  I have never attempted to prove an exhaustive doctrine of Irresistable Grace with one scriptural reference from Romans.  Such a discussion would involve dozens of scriptures to prove.  I am confronting your position that the Holy Spirit can always be resisted by man.

Quote
Lets look at what the passage is really saying:

This passsage has to do with Gods dealing with Pharoah.. The question is if The salvation of Pharoah is in view in this passage or something else.. Had Da525382 taken the time to look at the questions I asked he would have seen that it is not dealing with salvation

Your condescending insult about my complete stupidity in not having the slightest idea where your endless questions are trying to lead notwithstanding, sure, it is not dealing with salvation if you discard your own sovereign election by God Himself as not saving you.  What do you think election is?  That is his engaged context, defending God' sovereign elect, the remnant chosen by grace, of which you and I and all of us are now a part.  The example of Pharoah is to show God's sovereignty in the life of any individual, his working to have mercy or to harden as He so chooses, it really is not that difficult.

Quote
Lets look at the passage: For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might show my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth. Romans 9:17

. Why was Pharaoh raised up?a. For  God to prove to Israel that it was the Lord who delivered them. Ex 6:6-7 ,10:1-2, 13:14-16
b. To show Pharaoh that God is the one and only God. Ex 9:14
c.That the Egyptians would know that he was God. Ex 7:5, 14:4,18
d. That his name might be declared throughout the whole earth. Ex 9:16 , Romans 9:17

These purposes were realized by:a. Israel  exodus 14:31
b. Pharaoh and the Egyptians   ex 14:17-18,25
c. Throughout the earth  josh 2:10-11 and 1 sam 4:7-8


Well, good for you.  And what does this have to do with the price of tea in China. You're not seriously berating Paul for using Pharoah as his example of God hardening whomever he so pleases, are you?  The very next verse after this one Paul says in summary or conclusory fashion, after having just discussed Pharoah's example, "so then", to make his point:

Quote
18So then he has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills.

Quote
Next lets look the harding of Pharoah:
Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth. Romans 9:8

a. The hardening was not towards salvation. After all in Calvinism’s system why would a totally depraved man need to be hardened? In fact verses like this contradict Calvinism’s  view of total depravity. ( see also  john 12:40) . When hardening takes place its always because the light given has been rejected. The hardening is always in reference to letting Israel go, not believing  or obeying what god said in reference to salvation. ( ex 4:21, 7:3-4 , 10:1,20,27, 14:8)

Who cares what the hardening was "towards", Dream, that is not the context of Paul here, that context is God's sovereign choices.  It is not an issue of "Calvinism", however you define it, it is a scriptural truth Paul is presenting.  He just told you the hardening (or mercy) is as God Himself chooses in verse 18, that is the conclusion he brings us to, right in the verse.  It doesn't matter what it's in reference to, it is God's own choice always, that's his very point.

Quote
b. The hardening was not permanent. This is seen in that God is not said to have hardened Pharaohs heart just once but on several occasions.  Ex 9:12,10:27, 14:

So what?

Quote
c. Pharaohs will was already set before God hardened him .  Ex 3:19

So what?

Quote
d. Pharaoh also hardened his own heart. Ex 7:13-14,22, 8:15,19,32,  9:7, 34-35

So what?  Now are you trying to lecture Paul on stating God hardened him?

Quote
e. Pharaoh hardened his own heart first. Ex 5:1, ex 7:13  it would seem also that long before any of these events had taken place that pharaoh had already rejected the light given.

So what?

Quote
f. Hardened (chazaq) can mean strengthen. Judges 3:12, 16:28 God simply made Pharaoh strong to carry out what Pharaoh already of his own will wanted to do. God did not give him a wicked desire to rebel against him. He just gave him the courage to carry out his own desire.

According to Paul, God did just the opposite of having mercy on him.  It really is not complicated to glean this from reading the passage.

Quote
g. Romans 2:5 supports the idea that man not God does the initial hardening.

So, now you are using a passage that doesn't even describe who hardens what first, this scripture does not put God in the back seat of your taxi cab, Dream, it doesn't neuter Him, and it certainly doesn't in anyway contradict Paul's characterization of God's hardening of man as He so chooses to do.

Quote
Verse 19 is obviously the key. In that verse we find the assertion that God's will cannot be resisted. But as we have already established, the question is "which part of God's will cannot be resisted?"Paul is obviously refering the reader back to the history of Pharaoh when God brought Israel out of Egypt under Moses. So, let's just ask the question. Is God drawing Pharaoh to repentence? Absolutely not. There is nothing in this passage like that. So, where in this passage do we see any indication that when God's Spirit draws us, He cannot be resisted? Nowhere!

Yours is a spin.  The use of Pharoah is to establish God's own choices, not man's.  It could not be plainer on its face.  And you drive again this argument I've answered numerous times now that yes He can be resisted, but that resistance is of not import, it can be dealt with as God so chooses, should he choose to defeat it, He will, He did so with Paul on the road to Damascus as I previously discussed, and which you simply skip over.  You go back and back to this fact that man can resist, when I have repeated told you that I agree, but that that is not the issue at all here, again, the issue is whether God can overcome that resistance whenever He so chooses.  That is the scriptural reality you reject.

Quote
The fact is he can be resisted: Acts 7:51 You stiff-necked people, with uncircumcised hearts and ears! You are just like your fathers: You always resist the Holy Spirit!

Ditto.

Quote
Romans 9:20 Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus?

Ditto. (and Amen, by the way)

Quote
Paul does not forbid us to ask questions concerning the manner of Gods election. Rather what Paul forbids us to do is complain against God.  God urges us to study the scripture to attain understanding and wisdom. 2 tim 2: 15 3:16-17  The text does not say anything about Gods unconditional election it does however say God has the ultimate say in his choice.

The complaint against God in this passage is grounded in man's own view of God's choices, pondering their unfairness, their intolerance.  Paul quite simply is reminding these people that God's choices are His own and no one else's, and that those choices are not under our scrutiny


I have clearly stated my position scripturally and your saying "so what" changes nothing..

You continue to try to defend your position with Calvin's failed philosophy..

Can you using scripture show me where my position is wrong??? You opinion means nothing nor does mine with scripture backing...
Logged
Christian Forums
« Reply #121 on: February 13, 2008, 12:55:42 PM »
 Logged
segell
Hero
*****

Manna: 237
Offline Offline

Mood:

Gender: Male
Posts: 4369


segell

Blog entries (0)

View Profile
« Reply #122 on: February 13, 2008, 01:05:15 PM »
Quote from: dreamaccount2000 on February 13, 2008, 12:16:27 PM
Ezra 7:13
13 I make a decree, that all they of the people of Israel, and of his priests and Levites, in my realm, which are minded of their own free will to go up to Jerusalem, go with thee.
Leviticus 19:5
5 And if ye offer a sacrifice of peace offerings unto the LORD, ye shall offer it at your own will.

Deut:30:19 I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live


Do you think that any of those words from God has the power, by His Spirit, to pierce the hearts of those to whom He is speaking?  Even you and me?
Logged
Ephesians 2:8-10  Who saves, how He saves, why He saves.

"8For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith–and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God– 9not by works, so that no one can boast. 10For we are God's workmanship, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do."
dreamaccount2000
Member
***

Manna: 4
Offline Offline

Mood:

Posts: 478

Blog entries (0)

View Profile
« Reply #123 on: February 13, 2008, 01:09:04 PM »
Quote from: segell on February 13, 2008, 11:49:08 AM
[quoteauthor=Dennis link=topic=21697.msg463047#msg463047 date=1202861896]
[/quote}
So, what does God do?  Well, He has given us His Son, His Word.  We are told that the Scriptures are God breathed.  We know that the Word becomes alive through the power of His Spirit.  We know the Word can pierce and convict.  In Acts 2:37, God's Word pierced (cut deeply) into the hearts of 3,000 people.  Their hearts were changed.  (We see God's work in His people as reflected in Ezekiel 36:24-27). Changed by their ability to choose?  Or by the power of God's Spirit at work?  When our hearts are pierced and we are convicted of our sin and desperate need of a Savior, we cry out for mercy and forgiveness and place our confidence in Christ Jesus - not in our ability to have chosen Him, but in His perfect glory and grace and redeeming power.  We do indeed place our faith in Christ - but only because His Spirit convicted us of our need.  God smashed through the stoniness of our hearts.  He did it and I believe He gets the entire glory for our salvation.


Still using those same 2 verses that do not teach what you wish they did.

Jimmy gave this response to Acts 2:37 and you never responded:

"And it would appear that, as seems to be typical, you leave out some of it.  Like the command given by Peter in response to their being pierced to the heart. 

Peter commanded that they "repent, and let each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ" (v. 38).   Obviously they, unlike you, believed what Peter said to them, because we read that, " those who had received his word were baptized; and there were added that day about three thousand souls." (v. 42). 

Noticed that it doesn't say  those who had received his word believed; and there were added that day about three thousand souls.  It says  "those who had received his word were baptized; and there were added that day about three thousand souls." They obviously believed before they even asked Peter how to go about solving their problem or they wouldn't have asked the question in the first place.  But it seems that wasn't quite enough.

Also I have already shown the passage in Ezk does not say what you wish it to say:

 This passage is speaking prophetically about the house of Israel returning to their own land in the last days. See deut 30:1-3 the restoration was dependent 1st on their repentance. Also see Ezek 18:31-32

This is scripture interpreting scripture
Logged
da525382
Guest
« Reply #124 on: February 13, 2008, 01:10:44 PM »
Quote from: dreamaccount2000 on February 13, 2008, 12:55:42 PM
Quote from: da525382 on February 13, 2008, 12:50:58 PM
First of all, Dream, thank you for finally making a declarative statement of your position, I appreciate it, that's what I have been trying to get from you this entire thread.  Now turning to your post:

Quote
Da525382 has stated that Romans 9:16-20 is proof of Iresitable grace but has failed to back it up

Whoa! Hold on just one minute.  This exchange between you and I is about one issue and one issue only: the ability of the Holy Spirit to overcome any resistance to Him by man.   I remind you that I proffered that position to you after your statement that the Holy Spirit can be resisted, with which I agreed, then you asked me for scriptures to support my proposition.  I responded that I would only begin citing one scripture at a time to test your sincerity, as in all previous correspondence here with me and with others as I see it, you do not engage, you tell people to go study or to go to a corner and answer your questions first.  I told you that would not happen with me.  And, as of this post, your controlling attempt to lead me in that direction has failed, and it always will with me.  So, in summary, let's be accurate here,  I have never attempted to prove an exhaustive doctrine of Irresistable Grace with one scriptural reference from Romans.  Such a discussion would involve dozens of scriptures to prove.  I am confronting your position that the Holy Spirit can always be resisted by man.

Quote
Lets look at what the passage is really saying:

This passsage has to do with Gods dealing with Pharoah.. The question is if The salvation of Pharoah is in view in this passage or something else.. Had Da525382 taken the time to look at the questions I asked he would have seen that it is not dealing with salvation

Your condescending insult about my complete stupidity in not having the slightest idea where your endless questions are trying to lead notwithstanding, sure, it is not dealing with salvation if you discard your own sovereign election by God Himself as not saving you.  What do you think election is?  That is his engaged context, defending God' sovereign elect, the remnant chosen by grace, of which you and I and all of us are now a part.  The example of Pharoah is to show God's sovereignty in the life of any individual, his working to have mercy or to harden as He so chooses, it really is not that difficult.

Quote
Lets look at the passage: For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might show my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth. Romans 9:17

. Why was Pharaoh raised up?a. For  God to prove to Israel that it was the Lord who delivered them. Ex 6:6-7 ,10:1-2, 13:14-16
b. To show Pharaoh that God is the one and only God. Ex 9:14
c.That the Egyptians would know that he was God. Ex 7:5, 14:4,18
d. That his name might be declared throughout the whole earth. Ex 9:16 , Romans 9:17

These purposes were realized by:a. Israel  exodus 14:31
b. Pharaoh and the Egyptians   ex 14:17-18,25
c. Throughout the earth  josh 2:10-11 and 1 sam 4:7-8


Well, good for you.  And what does this have to do with the price of tea in China. You're not seriously berating Paul for using Pharoah as his example of God hardening whomever he so pleases, are you?  The very next verse after this one Paul says in summary or conclusory fashion, after having just discussed Pharoah's example, "so then", to make his point:

Quote
18So then he has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills.

Quote
Next lets look the harding of Pharoah:
Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth. Romans 9:8

a. The hardening was not towards salvation. After all in Calvinism’s system why would a totally depraved man need to be hardened? In fact verses like this contradict Calvinism’s  view of total depravity. ( see also  john 12:40) . When hardening takes place its always because the light given has been rejected. The hardening is always in reference to letting Israel go, not believing  or obeying what god said in reference to salvation. ( ex 4:21, 7:3-4 , 10:1,20,27, 14:8)

Who cares what the hardening was "towards", Dream, that is not the context of Paul here, that context is God's sovereign choices.  It is not an issue of "Calvinism", however you define it, it is a scriptural truth Paul is presenting.  He just told you the hardening (or mercy) is as God Himself chooses in verse 18, that is the conclusion he brings us to, right in the verse.  It doesn't matter what it's in reference to, it is God's own choice always, that's his very point.

Quote
b. The hardening was not permanent. This is seen in that God is not said to have hardened Pharaohs heart just once but on several occasions.  Ex 9:12,10:27, 14:

So what?

Quote
c. Pharaohs will was already set before God hardened him .  Ex 3:19

So what?

Quote
d. Pharaoh also hardened his own heart. Ex 7:13-14,22, 8:15,19,32,  9:7, 34-35

So what?  Now are you trying to lecture Paul on stating God hardened him?

Quote
e. Pharaoh hardened his own heart first. Ex 5:1, ex 7:13  it would seem also that long before any of these events had taken place that pharaoh had already rejected the light given.

So what?

Quote
f. Hardened (chazaq) can mean strengthen. Judges 3:12, 16:28 God simply made Pharaoh strong to carry out what Pharaoh already of his own will wanted to do. God did not give him a wicked desire to rebel against him. He just gave him the courage to carry out his own desire.

According to Paul, God did just the opposite of having mercy on him.  It really is not complicated to glean this from reading the passage.

Quote
g. Romans 2:5 supports the idea that man not God does the initial hardening.

So, now you are using a passage that doesn't even describe who hardens what first, this scripture does not put God in the back seat of your taxi cab, Dream, it doesn't neuter Him, and it certainly doesn't in anyway contradict Paul's characterization of God's hardening of man as He so chooses to do.

Quote
Verse 19 is obviously the key. In that verse we find the assertion that God's will cannot be resisted. But as we have already established, the question is "which part of God's will cannot be resisted?"Paul is obviously refering the reader back to the history of Pharaoh when God brought Israel out of Egypt under Moses. So, let's just ask the question. Is God drawing Pharaoh to repentence? Absolutely not. There is nothing in this passage like that. So, where in this passage do we see any indication that when God's Spirit draws us, He cannot be resisted? Nowhere!

Yours is a spin.  The use of Pharoah is to establish God's own choices, not man's.  It could not be plainer on its face.  And you drive again this argument I've answered numerous times now that yes He can be resisted, but that resistance is of not import, it can be dealt with as God so chooses, should he choose to defeat it, He will, He did so with Paul on the road to Damascus as I previously discussed, and which you simply skip over.  You go back and back to this fact that man can resist, when I have repeated told you that I agree, but that that is not the issue at all here, again, the issue is whether God can overcome that resistance whenever He so chooses.  That is the scriptural reality you reject.

Quote
The fact is he can be resisted: Acts 7:51 You stiff-necked people, with uncircumcised hearts and ears! You are just like your fathers: You always resist the Holy Spirit!

Ditto.

Quote
Romans 9:20 Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus?

Ditto. (and Amen, by the way)

Quote
Paul does not forbid us to ask questions concerning the manner of Gods election. Rather what Paul forbids us to do is complain against God.  God urges us to study the scripture to attain understanding and wisdom. 2 tim 2: 15 3:16-17  The text does not say anything about Gods unconditional election it does however say God has the ultimate say in his choice.

The complaint against God in this passage is grounded in man's own view of God's choices, pondering their unfairness, their intolerance.  Paul quite simply is reminding these people that God's choices are His own and no one else's, and that those choices are not under our scrutiny


I have clearly stated my position scripturally and your saying "so what" changes nothing..

You continue to try to defend your position with Calvin's failed philosophy..

Can you using scripture show me where my position is wrong??? You opinion means nothing nor does mine with scripture backing...


Yes, I can understand your frustration here, Dream.  I am sorry you have chosen to reject, and worse, not even deal with the passage I presented to you in Romans 9 in a reciprocating discussion.  That is fine.  You seem to be able to discuss what you believe, but you simply cannot deal, it seems, with those individual pesky ol' scriptures in a continuum of declarative exchanges.  As I said, that is fine. A  discussion of a second scriptural passage on man's ultimate inability to resist God will obviously therefore, not follow on.
Logged
dreamaccount2000
Member
***

Manna: 4
Offline Offline

Mood:

Posts: 478

Blog entries (0)

View Profile
« Reply #125 on: February 13, 2008, 01:16:28 PM »
Quote from: da525382 on February 13, 2008, 01:10:44 PM
Quote from: dreamaccount2000 on February 13, 2008, 12:55:42 PM
Quote from: da525382 on February 13, 2008, 12:50:58 PM
First of all, Dream, thank you for finally making a declarative statement of your position, I appreciate it, that's what I have been trying to get from you this entire thread.  Now turning to your post:

Quote
Da525382 has stated that Romans 9:16-20 is proof of Iresitable grace but has failed to back it up

Whoa! Hold on just one minute.  This exchange between you and I is about one issue and one issue only: the ability of the Holy Spirit to overcome any resistance to Him by man.   I remind you that I proffered that position to you after your statement that the Holy Spirit can be resisted, with which I agreed, then you asked me for scriptures to support my proposition.  I responded that I would only begin citing one scripture at a time to test your sincerity, as in all previous correspondence here with me and with others as I see it, you do not engage, you tell people to go study or to go to a corner and answer your questions first.  I told you that would not happen with me.  And, as of this post, your controlling attempt to lead me in that direction has failed, and it always will with me.  So, in summary, let's be accurate here,  I have never attempted to prove an exhaustive doctrine of Irresistable Grace with one scriptural reference from Romans.  Such a discussion would involve dozens of scriptures to prove.  I am confronting your position that the Holy Spirit can always be resisted by man.

Quote
Lets look at what the passage is really saying:

This passsage has to do with Gods dealing with Pharoah.. The question is if The salvation of Pharoah is in view in this passage or something else.. Had Da525382 taken the time to look at the questions I asked he would have seen that it is not dealing with salvation

Your condescending insult about my complete stupidity in not having the slightest idea where your endless questions are trying to lead notwithstanding, sure, it is not dealing with salvation if you discard your own sovereign election by God Himself as not saving you.  What do you think election is?  That is his engaged context, defending God' sovereign elect, the remnant chosen by grace, of which you and I and all of us are now a part.  The example of Pharoah is to show God's sovereignty in the life of any individual, his working to have mercy or to harden as He so chooses, it really is not that difficult.

Quote
Lets look at the passage: For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might show my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth. Romans 9:17

. Why was Pharaoh raised up?a. For  God to prove to Israel that it was the Lord who delivered them. Ex 6:6-7 ,10:1-2, 13:14-16
b. To show Pharaoh that God is the one and only God. Ex 9:14
c.That the Egyptians would know that he was God. Ex 7:5, 14:4,18
d. That his name might be declared throughout the whole earth. Ex 9:16 , Romans 9:17

These purposes were realized by:a. Israel  exodus 14:31
b. Pharaoh and the Egyptians   ex 14:17-18,25
c. Throughout the earth  josh 2:10-11 and 1 sam 4:7-8


Well, good for you.  And what does this have to do with the price of tea in China. You're not seriously berating Paul for using Pharoah as his example of God hardening whomever he so pleases, are you?  The very next verse after this one Paul says in summary or conclusory fashion, after having just discussed Pharoah's example, "so then", to make his point:

Quote
18So then he has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills.

Quote
Next lets look the harding of Pharoah:
Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth. Romans 9:8

a. The hardening was not towards salvation. After all in Calvinism’s system why would a totally depraved man need to be hardened? In fact verses like this contradict Calvinism’s  view of total depravity. ( see also  john 12:40) . When hardening takes place its always because the light given has been rejected. The hardening is always in reference to letting Israel go, not believing  or obeying what god said in reference to salvation. ( ex 4:21, 7:3-4 , 10:1,20,27, 14:8)

Who cares what the hardening was "towards", Dream, that is not the context of Paul here, that context is God's sovereign choices.  It is not an issue of "Calvinism", however you define it, it is a scriptural truth Paul is presenting.  He just told you the hardening (or mercy) is as God Himself chooses in verse 18, that is the conclusion he brings us to, right in the verse.  It doesn't matter what it's in reference to, it is God's own choice always, that's his very point.

Quote
b. The hardening was not permanent. This is seen in that God is not said to have hardened Pharaohs heart just once but on several occasions.  Ex 9:12,10:27, 14:

So what?

Quote
c. Pharaohs will was already set before God hardened him .  Ex 3:19

So what?

Quote
d. Pharaoh also hardened his own heart. Ex 7:13-14,22, 8:15,19,32,  9:7, 34-35

So what?  Now are you trying to lecture Paul on stating God hardened him?

Quote
e. Pharaoh hardened his own heart first. Ex 5:1, ex 7:13  it would seem also that long before any of these events had taken place that pharaoh had already rejected the light given.

So what?

Quote
f. Hardened (chazaq) can mean strengthen. Judges 3:12, 16:28 God simply made Pharaoh strong to carry out what Pharaoh already of his own will wanted to do. God did not give him a wicked desire to rebel against him. He just gave him the courage to carry out his own desire.

According to Paul, God did just the opposite of having mercy on him.  It really is not complicated to glean this from reading the passage.

Quote
g. Romans 2:5 supports the idea that man not God does the initial hardening.

So, now you are using a passage that doesn't even describe who hardens what first, this scripture does not put God in the back seat of your taxi cab, Dream, it doesn't neuter Him, and it certainly doesn't in anyway contradict Paul's characterization of God's hardening of man as He so chooses to do.

Quote
Verse 19 is obviously the key. In that verse we find the assertion that God's will cannot be resisted. But as we have already established, the question is "which part of God's will cannot be resisted?"Paul is obviously refering the reader back to the history of Pharaoh when God brought Israel out of Egypt under Moses. So, let's just ask the question. Is God drawing Pharaoh to repentence? Absolutely not. There is nothing in this passage like that. So, where in this passage do we see any indication that when God's Spirit draws us, He cannot be resisted? Nowhere!

Yours is a spin.  The use of Pharoah is to establish God's own choices, not man's.  It could not be plainer on its face.  And you drive again this argument I've answered numerous times now that yes He can be resisted, but that resistance is of not import, it can be dealt with as God so chooses, should he choose to defeat it, He will, He did so with Paul on the road to Damascus as I previously discussed, and which you simply skip over.  You go back and back to this fact that man can resist, when I have repeated told you that I agree, but that that is not the issue at all here, again, the issue is whether God can overcome that resistance whenever He so chooses.  That is the scriptural reality you reject.

Quote
The fact is he can be resisted: Acts 7:51 You stiff-necked people, with uncircumcised hearts and ears! You are just like your fathers: You always resist the Holy Spirit!

Ditto.

Quote
Romans 9:20 Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus?

Ditto. (and Amen, by the way)

Quote
Paul does not forbid us to ask questions concerning the manner of Gods election. Rather what Paul forbids us to do is complain against God.  God urges us to study the scripture to attain understanding and wisdom. 2 tim 2: 15 3:16-17  The text does not say anything about Gods unconditional election it does however say God has the ultimate say in his choice.

The complaint against God in this passage is grounded in man's own view of God's choices, pondering their unfairness, their intolerance.  Paul quite simply is reminding these people that God's choices are His own and no one else's, and that those choices are not under our scrutiny


I have clearly stated my position scripturally and your saying "so what" changes nothing..

You continue to try to defend your position with Calvin's failed philosophy..

Can you using scripture show me where my position is wrong??? You opinion means nothing nor does mine with scripture backing...


Yes, I can understand your frustration here, Dream.  I am sorry you have chosen to reject, and worse, not even deal with the passage I presented to you in Romans 9 in a reciprocating discussion.  That is fine.  You seem to be able to discuss what you believe, but you simply cannot deal, it seems, with those individual pesky ol' scriptures in a continuum of declarative exchanges.  As I said, that is fine. A  discussion of a second scriptural passage on man's ultimate inability to resist God will obviously therefore, not follow on.

Thats funny, anyone can look and see I have supported my position with scripture.. Which part of my post do you disagree with. Lets take them one at a time... Use scripture to outline your position not vain philosophy
Logged
Christian Forums
« Reply #125 on: February 13, 2008, 01:16:28 PM »
 Logged
Dennis
Hero
*****

Manna: 116
Offline Offline

Mood:

Gender: Male
Posts: 3869

Blog entries (0)

View Profile
« Reply #126 on: February 13, 2008, 01:43:32 PM »
Quote from: segell on February 13, 2008, 11:49:08 AM
Quote from: Dennis on February 12, 2008, 06:18:16 PM
I think it may.

You do not believe we are robots [and I thought that is what you would say] but argue against "libertarian" free choice. Dream, myself and others do not deny the power of the Spirit but argue that man chooses.

How much do we really disagree?  Instead of attacking our pet straw men, let's try to find out where we actually agree or disagree.  Is it merely a matter of degree?  Is it semantics?  What is it?

Dennis -

Thanks for the comments and the manor in which you conduct your end of the conversation.  I'll try and respond to the questions, but I would like to make a preliminary comment.

I think some of the difficulty (at least to me) is that these discussions get somewhat blurred when competing theologies are being championed by each side.  I don't espouse that I'm a Calvinist - although my understanding of Scripture would certainly parallel some of Calvin's tenets.  As I've written on this site before, I try and limit my comments on issues of salvation. 

As for salvation, there are a couple of things I rely on:  Scripture, teachings and my own experience and relationship with God.  And frankly, Dennis, I don't believe my salvation experience to be different than anyone else who has been saved.  In fact, I believe the process is the same with all who come to a saving knowledge of and relationship with God through Christ Jesus. 

So with that said I'll try and respond to the questions:

Quote
How much do we really disagree? Is it merely a matter of degree?  Is it semantics?  What is it?

I think this discussion boils down to two issues.  Man's condition before being saved and God's work in bringing healing to that condition.  That's what I try to confine my conversation to.

I believe that man is depraved.  The Bible tells us of our condition.  My goodness, we can look around us and see example after example of man's condition.  It is sinful.  The Bible tells us that we were at enmity with God.  That's God's perspective.  He tells us our hearts are as stone.  He tells us that apart from Him we are entirely unable to do anything.  I could go on and on.  I hope the point is made concerning this condition all of mankind find themselves in.  It is a fatal condition requiring a healing we cannot, in any way, provide.  We, mankind, have made our choice.  We have rejected God and frankly, elevated our selves to the position of God.  For all have sinned, the Bible tells us.  And God says we despise His Word when we sin.  Sometimes I think it is difficult to see ourselves in the light of God's holiness and from His perspective.

So, what does God do?  Well, He has given us His Son, His Word.  We are told that the Scriptures are God breathed.  We know that the Word becomes alive through the power of His Spirit.  We know the Word can pierce and convict.  In Acts 2:37, God's Word pierced (cut deeply) into the hearts of 3,000 people.  Their hearts were changed.  (We see God's work in His people as reflected in Ezekiel 36:24-27). Changed by their ability to choose?  Or by the power of God's Spirit at work?  When our hearts are pierced and we are convicted of our sin and desperate need of a Savior, we cry out for mercy and forgiveness and place our confidence in Christ Jesus - not in our ability to have chosen Him, but in His perfect glory and grace and redeeming power.  We do indeed place our faith in Christ - but only because His Spirit convicted us of our need.  God smashed through the stoniness of our hearts.  He did it and I believe He gets the entire glory for our salvation.

Ephesians 2:8 begins with the words "For it is by grace you have been saved...."  And I believe that deeply.  That is by and through the power of God and His inestimable grace.  It is where I take my first step when I begin my study of salvation.  It was by God's grace that I was saved.  Now, I came to Christ later in my life.  Perhaps that brings a certain perspective.  But, Dennis, I know deep in my heart that I did not have the power within me to choose God.  But, something happened in my heart that Saturday morning when I heard God's Word being preached.  Something happened that changed my heart forever.  And I know it was God who pierced my heart with His Truth and I could begin seeing my utter need for a Savior.  I believe that God's Word is delivered by the power of His Spirit and I believe it is in that power that one's heart is changed so that one can cry out to the living Lord.

Dennis, thanks for your patience with me.  I don't know if it is semantics or not. I try to reflect what I believe the Scriptures reflect and what God has done in my life.   

So, does this explanation help in moving us toward an understanding?  I hope so.

Blessings.

Steve
It seems to me that we may be talking about different issues.  There is much you say I can agree with.  I will try to articulate my disagreement later when I have more time.
Logged
da525382
Guest
« Reply #127 on: February 13, 2008, 02:12:57 PM »
Quote from: dreamaccount2000 on February 13, 2008, 01:16:28 PM
Quote from: da525382 on February 13, 2008, 01:10:44 PM
Quote from: dreamaccount2000 on February 13, 2008, 12:55:42 PM
Quote from: da525382 on February 13, 2008, 12:50:58 PM
First of all, Dream, thank you for finally making a declarative statement of your position, I appreciate it, that's what I have been trying to get from you this entire thread.  Now turning to your post:

Quote
Da525382 has stated that Romans 9:16-20 is proof of Iresitable grace but has failed to back it up

Whoa! Hold on just one minute.  This exchange between you and I is about one issue and one issue only: the ability of the Holy Spirit to overcome any resistance to Him by man.   I remind you that I proffered that position to you after your statement that the Holy Spirit can be resisted, with which I agreed, then you asked me for scriptures to support my proposition.  I responded that I would only begin citing one scripture at a time to test your sincerity, as in all previous correspondence here with me and with others as I see it, you do not engage, you tell people to go study or to go to a corner and answer your questions first.  I told you that would not happen with me.  And, as of this post, your controlling attempt to lead me in that direction has failed, and it always will with me.  So, in summary, let's be accurate here,  I have never attempted to prove an exhaustive doctrine of Irresistable Grace with one scriptural reference from Romans.  Such a discussion would involve dozens of scriptures to prove.  I am confronting your position that the Holy Spirit can always be resisted by man.

Quote
Lets look at what the passage is really saying:

This passsage has to do with Gods dealing with Pharoah.. The question is if The salvation of Pharoah is in view in this passage or something else.. Had Da525382 taken the time to look at the questions I asked he would have seen that it is not dealing with salvation

Your condescending insult about my complete stupidity in not having the slightest idea where your endless questions are trying to lead notwithstanding, sure, it is not dealing with salvation if you discard your own sovereign election by God Himself as not saving you.  What do you think election is?  That is his engaged context, defending God' sovereign elect, the remnant chosen by grace, of which you and I and all of us are now a part.  The example of Pharoah is to show God's sovereignty in the life of any individual, his working to have mercy or to harden as He so chooses, it really is not that difficult.

Quote
Lets look at the passage: For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might show my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth. Romans 9:17

. Why was Pharaoh raised up?a. For  God to prove to Israel that it was the Lord who delivered them. Ex 6:6-7 ,10:1-2, 13:14-16
b. To show Pharaoh that God is the one and only God. Ex 9:14
c.That the Egyptians would know that he was God. Ex 7:5, 14:4,18
d. That his name might be declared throughout the whole earth. Ex 9:16 , Romans 9:17

These purposes were realized by:a. Israel  exodus 14:31
b. Pharaoh and the Egyptians   ex 14:17-18,25
c. Throughout the earth  josh 2:10-11 and 1 sam 4:7-8


Well, good for you.  And what does this have to do with the price of tea in China. You're not seriously berating Paul for using Pharoah as his example of God hardening whomever he so pleases, are you?  The very next verse after this one Paul says in summary or conclusory fashion, after having just discussed Pharoah's example, "so then", to make his point:

Quote
18So then he has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills.

Quote
Next lets look the harding of Pharoah:
Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth. Romans 9:8

a. The hardening was not towards salvation. After all in Calvinism’s system why would a totally depraved man need to be hardened? In fact verses like this contradict Calvinism’s  view of total depravity. ( see also  john 12:40) . When hardening takes place its always because the light given has been rejected. The hardening is always in reference to letting Israel go, not believing  or obeying what god said in reference to salvation. ( ex 4:21, 7:3-4 , 10:1,20,27, 14:8)

Who cares what the hardening was "towards", Dream, that is not the context of Paul here, that context is God's sovereign choices.  It is not an issue of "Calvinism", however you define it, it is a scriptural truth Paul is presenting.  He just told you the hardening (or mercy) is as God Himself chooses in verse 18, that is the conclusion he brings us to, right in the verse.  It doesn't matter what it's in reference to, it is God's own choice always, that's his very point.

Quote
b. The hardening was not permanent. This is seen in that God is not said to have hardened Pharaohs heart just once but on several occasions.  Ex 9:12,10:27, 14:

So what?

Quote
c. Pharaohs will was already set before God hardened him .  Ex 3:19

So what?

Quote
d. Pharaoh also hardened his own heart. Ex 7:13-14,22, 8:15,19,32,  9:7, 34-35

So what?  Now are you trying to lecture Paul on stating God hardened him?

Quote
e. Pharaoh hardened his own heart first. Ex 5:1, ex 7:13  it would seem also that long before any of these events had taken place that pharaoh had already rejected the light given.

So what?

Quote
f. Hardened (chazaq) can mean strengthen. Judges 3:12, 16:28 God simply made Pharaoh strong to carry out what Pharaoh already of his own will wanted to do. God did not give him a wicked desire to rebel against him. He just gave him the courage to carry out his own desire.

According to Paul, God did just the opposite of having mercy on him.  It really is not complicated to glean this from reading the passage.

Quote
g. Romans 2:5 supports the idea that man not God does the initial hardening.

So, now you are using a passage that doesn't even describe who hardens what first, this scripture does not put God in the back seat of your taxi cab, Dream, it doesn't neuter Him, and it certainly doesn't in anyway contradict Paul's characterization of God's hardening of man as He so chooses to do.

Quote
Verse 19 is obviously the key. In that verse we find the assertion that God's will cannot be resisted. But as we have already established, the question is "which part of God's will cannot be resisted?"Paul is obviously refering the reader back to the history of Pharaoh when God brought Israel out of Egypt under Moses. So, let's just ask the question. Is God drawing Pharaoh to repentence? Absolutely not. There is nothing in this passage like that. So, where in this passage do we see any indication that when God's Spirit draws us, He cannot be resisted? Nowhere!

Yours is a spin.  The use of Pharoah is to establish God's own choices, not man's.  It could not be plainer on its face.  And you drive again this argument I've answered numerous times now that yes He can be resisted, but that resistance is of not import, it can be dealt with as God so chooses, should he choose to defeat it, He will, He did so with Paul on the road to Damascus as I previously discussed, and which you simply skip over.  You go back and back to this fact that man can resist, when I have repeated told you that I agree, but that that is not the issue at all here, again, the issue is whether God can overcome that resistance whenever He so chooses.  That is the scriptural reality you reject.

Quote
The fact is he can be resisted: Acts 7:51 You stiff-necked people, with uncircumcised hearts and ears! You are just like your fathers: You always resist the Holy Spirit!

Ditto.

Quote
Romans 9:20 Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus?

Ditto. (and Amen, by the way)

Quote
Paul does not forbid us to ask questions concerning the manner of Gods election. Rather what Paul forbids us to do is complain against God.  God urges us to study the scripture to attain understanding and wisdom. 2 tim 2: 15 3:16-17  The text does not say anything about Gods unconditional election it does however say God has the ultimate say in his choice.

The complaint against God in this passage is grounded in man's own view of God's choices, pondering their unfairness, their intolerance.  Paul quite simply is reminding these people that God's choices are His own and no one else's, and that those choices are not under our scrutiny


I have clearly stated my position scripturally and your saying "so what" changes nothing..

You continue to try to defend your position with Calvin's failed philosophy..

Can you using scripture show me where my position is wrong??? You opinion means nothing nor does mine with scripture backing...


Yes, I can understand your frustration here, Dream.  I am sorry you have chosen to reject, and worse, not even deal with the passage I presented to you in Romans 9 in a reciprocating discussion.  That is fine.  You seem to be able to discuss what you believe, but you simply cannot deal, it seems, with those individual pesky ol' scriptures in a continuum of declarative exchanges.  As I said, that is fine. A  discussion of a second scriptural passage on man's ultimate inability to resist God will obviously therefore, not follow on.

Thats funny, anyone can look and see I have supported my position with scripture.. Which part of my post do you disagree with. Lets take them one at a time... Use scripture to outline your position not vain philosophy

No, Dream, it just won't work with me.  I already broke your post down into sections, all of it, in my post, and responded in kind to each section, investing a great amount of time.  It is your turn, should you desire, to take each responsive section I have made and simply respond again in kind to it, rather than just to back-handedly be dismissive of it.  It's called discourse.  I, as I have said before, will not tolerate your own diversional nose-leading behavior, and therefore, no, as long as you refuse to engage, that will similarly be my response to you.
Logged
dreamaccount2000
Member
***

Manna: 4
Offline Offline

Mood:

Posts: 478

Blog entries (0)

View Profile
« Reply #128 on: February 13, 2008, 03:24:18 PM »
Quote from: da525382 on February 13, 2008, 02:12:57 PM
Quote from: dreamaccount2000 on February 13, 2008, 01:16:28 PM
Quote from: da525382 on February 13, 2008, 01:10:44 PM
Quote from: dreamaccount2000 on February 13, 2008, 12:55:42 PM
Quote from: da525382 on February 13, 2008, 12:50:58 PM
First of all, Dream, thank you for finally making a declarative statement of your position, I appreciate it, that's what I have been trying to get from you this entire thread.  Now turning to your post:

Quote
Da525382 has stated that Romans 9:16-20 is proof of Iresitable grace but has failed to back it up

Whoa! Hold on just one minute.  This exchange between you and I is about one issue and one issue only: the ability of the Holy Spirit to overcome any resistance to Him by man.   I remind you that I proffered that position to you after your statement that the Holy Spirit can be resisted, with which I agreed, then you asked me for scriptures to support my proposition.  I responded that I would only begin citing one scripture at a time to test your sincerity, as in all previous correspondence here with me and with others as I see it, you do not engage, you tell people to go study or to go to a corner and answer your questions first.  I told you that would not happen with me.  And, as of this post, your controlling attempt to lead me in that direction has failed, and it always will with me.  So, in summary, let's be accurate here,  I have never attempted to prove an exhaustive doctrine of Irresistable Grace with one scriptural reference from Romans.  Such a discussion would involve dozens of scriptures to prove.  I am confronting your position that the Holy Spirit can always be resisted by man.

Quote
Lets look at what the passage is really saying:

This passsage has to do with Gods dealing with Pharoah.. The question is if The salvation of Pharoah is in view in this passage or something else.. Had Da525382 taken the time to look at the questions I asked he would have seen that it is not dealing with salvation

Your condescending insult about my complete stupidity in not having the slightest idea where your endless questions are trying to lead notwithstanding, sure, it is not dealing with salvation if you discard your own sovereign election by God Himself as not saving you.  What do you think election is?  That is his engaged context, defending God' sovereign elect, the remnant chosen by grace, of which you and I and all of us are now a part.  The example of Pharoah is to show God's sovereignty in the life of any individual, his working to have mercy or to harden as He so chooses, it really is not that difficult.

Quote
Lets look at the passage: For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might show my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth. Romans 9:17

. Why was Pharaoh raised up?a. For  God to prove to Israel that it was the Lord who delivered them. Ex 6:6-7 ,10:1-2, 13:14-16
b. To show Pharaoh that God is the one and only God. Ex 9:14
c.That the Egyptians would know that he was God. Ex 7:5, 14:4,18
d. That his name might be declared throughout the whole earth. Ex 9:16 , Romans 9:17

These purposes were realized by:a. Israel  exodus 14:31
b. Pharaoh and the Egyptians   ex 14:17-18,25
c. Throughout the earth  josh 2:10-11 and 1 sam 4:7-8


Well, good for you.  And what does this have to do with the price of tea in China. You're not seriously berating Paul for using Pharoah as his example of God hardening whomever he so pleases, are you?  The very next verse after this one Paul says in summary or conclusory fashion, after having just discussed Pharoah's example, "so then", to make his point:

Quote
18So then he has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills.

Quote
Next lets look the harding of Pharoah:
Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth. Romans 9:8

a. The hardening was not towards salvation. After all in Calvinism’s system why would a totally depraved man need to be hardened? In fact verses like this contradict Calvinism’s  view of total depravity. ( see also  john 12:40) . When hardening takes place its always because the light given has been rejected. The hardening is always in reference to letting Israel go, not believing  or obeying what god said in reference to salvation. ( ex 4:21, 7:3-4 , 10:1,20,27, 14:8)

Who cares what the hardening was "towards", Dream, that is not the context of Paul here, that context is God's sovereign choices.  It is not an issue of "Calvinism", however you define it, it is a scriptural truth Paul is presenting.  He just told you the hardening (or mercy) is as God Himself chooses in verse 18, that is the conclusion he brings us to, right in the verse.  It doesn't matter what it's in reference to, it is God's own choice always, that's his very point.

Quote
b. The hardening was not permanent. This is seen in that God is not said to have hardened Pharaohs heart just once but on several occasions.  Ex 9:12,10:27, 14:

So what?

Quote
c. Pharaohs will was already set before God hardened him .  Ex 3:19

So what?

Quote
d. Pharaoh also hardened his own heart. Ex 7:13-14,22, 8:15,19,32,  9:7, 34-35

So what?  Now are you trying to lecture Paul on stating God hardened him?

Quote
e. Pharaoh hardened his own heart first. Ex 5:1, ex 7:13  it would seem also that long before any of these events had taken place that pharaoh had already rejected the light given.

So what?

Quote
f. Hardened (chazaq) can mean strengthen. Judges 3:12, 16:28 God simply made Pharaoh strong to carry out what Pharaoh already of his own will wanted to do. God did not give him a wicked desire to rebel against him. He just gave him the courage to carry out his own desire.

According to Paul, God did just the opposite of having mercy on him.  It really is not complicated to glean this from reading the passage.

Quote
g. Romans 2:5 supports the idea that man not God does the initial hardening.

So, now you are using a passage that doesn't even describe who hardens what first, this scripture does not put God in the back seat of your taxi cab, Dream, it doesn't neuter Him, and it certainly doesn't in anyway contradict Paul's characterization of God's hardening of man as He so chooses to do.

Quote
Verse 19 is obviously the key. In that verse we find the assertion that God's will cannot be resisted. But as we have already established, the question is "which part of God's will cannot be resisted?"Paul is obviously refering the reader back to the history of Pharaoh when God brought Israel out of Egypt under Moses. So, let's just ask the question. Is God drawing Pharaoh to repentence? Absolutely not. There is nothing in this passage like that. So, where in this passage do we see any indication that when God's Spirit draws us, He cannot be resisted? Nowhere!

Yours is a spin.  The use of Pharoah is to establish God's own choices, not man's.  It could not be plainer on its face.  And you drive again this argument I've answered numerous times now that yes He can be resisted, but that resistance is of not import, it can be dealt with as God so chooses, should he choose to defeat it, He will, He did so with Paul on the road to Damascus as I previously discussed, and which you simply skip over.  You go back and back to this fact that man can resist, when I have repeated told you that I agree, but that that is not the issue at all here, again, the issue is whether God can overcome that resistance whenever He so chooses.  That is the scriptural reality you reject.

Quote
The fact is he can be resisted: Acts 7:51 You stiff-necked people, with uncircumcised hearts and ears! You are just like your fathers: You always resist the Holy Spirit!

Ditto.

Quote
Romans 9:20 Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus?

Ditto. (and Amen, by the way)

Quote
Paul does not forbid us to ask questions concerning the manner of Gods election. Rather what Paul forbids us to do is complain against God.  God urges us to study the scripture to attain understanding and wisdom. 2 tim 2: 15 3:16-17  The text does not say anything about Gods unconditional election it does however say God has the ultimate say in his choice.

The complaint against God in this passage is grounded in man's own view of God's choices, pondering their unfairness, their intolerance.  Paul quite simply is reminding these people that God's choices are His own and no one else's, and that those choices are not under our scrutiny


I have clearly stated my position scripturally and your saying "so what" changes nothing..

You continue to try to defend your position with Calvin's failed philosophy..

Can you using scripture show me where my position is wrong??? You opinion means nothing nor does mine with scripture backing...


Yes, I can understand your frustration here, Dream.  I am sorry you have chosen to reject, and worse, not even deal with the passage I presented to you in Romans 9 in a reciprocating discussion.  That is fine.  You seem to be able to discuss what you believe, but you simply cannot deal, it seems, with those individual pesky ol' scriptures in a continuum of declarative exchanges.  As I said, that is fine. A  discussion of a second scriptural passage on man's ultimate inability to resist God will obviously therefore, not follow on.

Thats funny, anyone can look and see I have supported my position with scripture.. Which part of my post do you disagree with. Lets take them one at a time... Use scripture to outline your position not vain philosophy

No, Dream, it just won't work with me.  I already broke your post down into sections, all of it, in my post, and responded in kind to each section, investing a great amount of time.  It is your turn, should you desire, to take each responsive section I have made and simply respond again in kind to it, rather than just to back-handedly be dismissive of it.  It's called discourse.  I, as I have said before, will not tolerate your own diversional nose-leading behavior, and therefore, no, as long as you refuse to engage, that will similarly be my response to you.

Sorry, "So what "does not cut it... I will just take it that you cannot identify what part of my psot you disagree with nor can you back up your position... Thanks
Logged
Tantor
Guest
« Reply #129 on: February 13, 2008, 03:26:49 PM »
It would be nice to see dream actually answer a question for once.
Logged
Christian Forums
« Reply #129 on: February 13, 2008, 03:26:49 PM »
 Logged
dreamaccount2000
Member
***

Manna: 4
Offline Offline

Mood:

Posts: 478

Blog entries (0)

View Profile
« Reply #130 on: February 13, 2008, 03:40:07 PM »
Quote from: Tantor on February 13, 2008, 03:26:49 PM
It would be nice to see dream actually answer a question for once.


Tantor ole buddy, the guy who thinks the bible is full of errors, Been all translated wrong but somehow Tantor knows which part is true and which part is not..

Fact is I gave a scriptural answer.. Why dont you address it and tell me what parts you disagree with and we will go from there..
Logged
Tantor
Guest
« Reply #131 on: February 13, 2008, 03:44:21 PM »
da525382 disagreed with you all over the place and responded to your post and asked for you to be gentleman enough to do the same and rebut his post.

And you so rudely dismissed it.

Which just goes to prove once again that when you visit this board you are way out of your league.

And no, I dont believe the bible in its original form is in error.. I have just been around long enough to know that any attempt at translation by humans is frought with errors..

Humans aren't near as smart as they think they are. (take you for example).
Logged
segell
Hero
*****

Manna: 237
Offline Offline

Mood:

Gender: Male
Posts: 4369


segell

Blog entries (0)

View Profile
« Reply #132 on: February 13, 2008, 03:48:51 PM »
By the way, this just came to me when driving home today.

When it comes to salvation, I think man responds.  And the man capable of responding has had his heart pierced by Truth.
Logged
Ephesians 2:8-10  Who saves, how He saves, why He saves.

"8For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith–and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God– 9not by works, so that no one can boast. 10For we are God's workmanship, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do."
Christian Forums
« Reply #132 on: February 13, 2008, 03:48:51 PM »
 Logged
dreamaccount2000
Member
***

Manna: 4
Offline Offline

Mood:

Posts: 478

Blog entries (0)

View Profile
« Reply #133 on: February 13, 2008, 03:49:07 PM »
Quote from: Tantor on February 13, 2008, 03:44:21 PM
da525382 disagreed with you all over the place and responded to your post and asked for you to be gentleman enough to do the same and rebut his post.

And you so rudely dismissed it.

Which just goes to prove once again that when you visit this board you are way out of your league.

And no, I dont believe the bible in its original form is in error.. I have just been around long enough to know that any attempt at translation by humans is frought with errors..

Humans aren't near as smart as they think they are. (take you for example).


No, Da responded with " So What"  Hardley a valid response.. Would you like to try?Confused?
Logged
dreamaccount2000
Member
***

Manna: 4
Offline Offline

Mood:

Posts: 478

Blog entries (0)

View Profile
« Reply #134 on: February 13, 2008, 03:51:10 PM »
Quote from: segell on February 13, 2008, 03:48:51 PM
By the way, this just came to me when driving home today.

When it comes to salvation, I think man responds.  And the man capable of responding has had his heart pierced by Truth.

True, No matter how they respond. They may respond positive or negative.
Logged
Eleven (11) Reasons to Reject Libertarian Free Will. - Pages: 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 Go Up Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  



Login with username, password and session length

Grace-Centered Christian Forums
Bible concordance | abortion ticker | is God real? | galaga | play tetris | copter game | mini golf games | arcade | donkey kong | Christian marriage help | articles | privacy
Powered by SMF | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC