Did Jesus Die on The Cross for The Just/Elect/Saved Whose Names Are Written in The Book of Life OR

[Niki7]

A patently false statement.

Reformed theology is true because spiritually dead people are helpless, hapless and powerless to save themselves.

Your analogy with the conscious, aware kid failing to look both ways is lame because the dead are unaware and insensitive to spiritual truth making, since they naturally suppress by their wickedness, making the unable to respond positively to the gospel. You missed my biblical "Free Will" Analogy in my 4522, did you?

Cannot address the scripture....AGAIN....so instead you try to make it all about me

Thanks but I don't need/want your attention. I am sure you know what scripture I referenced below: John 3:16.

The Bible says For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.

The reformed state that God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son so that whomever God chooses should not perish but have everlasting life.

Strangely enough, the actual and ONLY people God has chosen are the Jews.

Predestination, according to the reformed, means that you basically had no choice and God decided you would be saved in spite of yourself.

Predestination according to scripture, means that once you are a follower of Christ, you are then predestined to have eternal life and follow Christ during your earthly life.

The reformed will tell you that God ordained that your child would be killed by a car because they did not look both ways before crossing a busy road.

The Bible states that sin has entered this world and we all suffer because of it. God did not kill your child; your child had the option to look both ways, God did not force him/her to look straight ahead and be killed.

 

[Mem]

That would be an assumption though

Paul is quoting the OT. As it is written, Jacob I have loved but esau I have hated.

This is a quote from Malachi,

“I have loved you,” says the Lord.
“Yet you say, ‘In what way have You loved us?’
Was not Esau Jacob’s brother?”
Says the Lord.
“Yet Jacob I have loved;
3 But Esau I have hated,

God is not talking about 2 prenatal babies, He is talking about the nations who came from them, He is talking to The nation of Israel (jacob)

And he is compairing them with Jacobs brother Esau (edom) whom God destroyed because of their unbelief.

Sadly. Romans 9 is taken out of context by a certain group..

Yes, an explanation is offered that Isaac blesses Jacob with "the dew of heaven and the fatness of the earth" and also blesses Esau with "the fatness of the earth and the dew of heaven" in reverse order that reveals Jacob's greater blessing of the heavenly harvest because Jacob regarded the blessings from above as greater than that of the earth, but that requires a faith since it cannot be naturally seen. And it seems to me that the subsequent context in Malachi alludes to the same mistake that Cain must have made in his offering.

 

[Everlasting-Grace]

Yes, an explanation is offered that Isaac blesses Jacob with "the dew of heaven and the fatness of the earth" and also blesses Esau with "the fatness of the earth and the dew of heaven" in reverse order that reveals Jacob's greater blessing of the heavenly harvest because Jacob regarded the blessings from above as greater than that of the earth, but that requires a faith since it cannot be naturally seen. And it seems to me that the subsequent context in Malachi alludes to the same mistake that Cain must have made in his offering.

What does this have to do with God hating esau before he was born?

 

[Mem]

What does this have to do with God hating esau before he was born?

If God hated Esau, the person, at all, it would only apply retrospectively, because Esau was, indeed, afforded the choice between his inheritance and a bowl of beans.

 

[Everlasting-Grace]

If God hated Esau, the person, at all, it would only apply retrospectively, because Esau was, indeed, afforded the choice between his inheritance and a bowl of beans.

SO God hated esau because he rejected his inheritance?

But God said he chose Jacob before they even came from his mothers womb.. Not because he hated Esau, But because he did it his way.

Is that not romans 9 is all about. Answering the question about Israel (did God make a mistake?)

 

[Mem]

SO God hated esau because he rejected his inheritance?

But God said he chose Jacob before they even came from his mothers womb.. Not because he hated Esau, But because he did it his way.

Is that not romans 9 is all about. Answering the question about Israel (did God make a mistake?)

What mistake might you (or I?) be suggesting that God made?

 

[Everlasting-Grace]

What mistake might you (or I?) be suggesting that God made?

The gentiles might be suggesting that God made a mistake choosing the nation of Israel. who crucified him..

Paul spends 3 chapters explaining that that is not true

 

[Mem]

The gentiles might be suggesting that God made a mistake choosing the nation of Israel. who crucified him..

Paul spends 3 chapters explaining that that is not true

The account of Joseph illustrates that Jesus will reveal Himself to His brothers.

 

[Everlasting-Grace]

Yes. But we are talking about Romans 9.

Is romans 9 about God hating one fetus and chosing him to hell before born, while loving the other.

or is romans 9 about Paul answering the questions concerning his bretheryn..

9 I tell the truth in Christ, I am not lying, my conscience also bearing me witness in the Holy Spirit, 2 that I have great sorrow and continual grief in my heart. 3 For I could wish that I myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my [a]countrymen according to the flesh, 4 who are Israelites, to whom pertain the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the service of God, and the promises; 5 of whom are the fathers and from whom, according to the flesh, Christ came, who is over all, the eternally blessed God. Amen.

Israel’s Rejection and God’s Purpose
6 But it is not that the word of God has taken no effect.

ie, Did God chose a nation and it take no affect? did he make a mistake?

 

[Rufus]

God's grace allows us to change our behavior, not our fallen nature.

Actually, God changes us by the power of the Holy Spirit. Read the New Covenant promises in Jer 31 and Ezek 36. Did Jesus' power allow Lazarus to decide to change his physical status from death to life? Is that your view of Jesus' miracle?

 

[MerSee]

Actually, God changes us by the power of the Holy Spirit. Read the New Covenant promises in Jer 31 and Ezek 36. Did Jesus' power allow Lazarus to decide to change his physical status from death to life? Is that your view of Jesus' miracle?

We choose to cooperate with God's grace.

 

[Rufus]

That would be an assumption though

Paul is quoting the OT. As it is written, Jacob I have loved but esau I have hated.

This is a quote from Malachi,

“I have loved you,” says the Lord.
“Yet you say, ‘In what way have You loved us?’
Was not Esau Jacob’s brother?”
Says the Lord.
“Yet Jacob I have loved;
3 But Esau I have hated,

God is not talking about 2 prenatal babies, He is talking about the nations who came from them, He is talking to The nation of Israel (jacob)

And he is compairing them with Jacobs brother Esau (edom) whom God destroyed because of their unbelief.

Sadly. Romans 9 is taken out of context by a certain group..

The Mal 1:2 passage and the Romans passage are looking at the the twins from two different perspectives. The former from an historical, horizontal, national perspective, and the latter from a vertical, eternal, individual perspective. Romans 9 is strictly about Unconditional Election of individuals -- not nations! And it's precisely because of God's eternal decree of election, that Paul could say that God's Word has not failed. And this is what Paul goes on to prove throughout the chapter. It's not the natural descendants of Abraham who are God's children, but the [chosen] children of promise. And God elected Jacob and rejected Esau in eternity before they did anything good or bad. This passage proves that God's sovereign decrees are not contingent on any of his creatures' desires, will or actions.

But you NRs can't use the context of Romans 9 itself, can you? You won't and can't because it demolishes your "free will" presuppositions. Romans 9 doesn't have God peering into his cosmic crystal ball checking out who is naughty and nice according to their future behavior, does it? Romans 9 is a wrecking ball that devastates NR heresies!

 

[Everlasting-Grace]

The Mal 1:2 passage and the Romans passage are looking at the the twins from two different perspectives.

I disagree. When you quote somethign that someone said,. then take them out of context of what they origionally said. you are in error.

The former from an historical, horizontal, national perspective, and the latter from a vertical, eternal, individual perspective.

Again, I disagree, The former is a fact. So is the latter.. the latter is a fact. Both speaking of the nation of Israel.

Romans 9 is strictly about Unconditional Election of individuals -- not nations!

This again is in error. The fist 5 verses brings us the context of the passage. its about Israel. Not induviduals.. In fact the whole 3 chapters are about this in context.

And it's precisely because of God's eternal decree of election, that Paul could say that God's Word has not failed.

It did not fail. why? Paul answered that in romans 11. Although Israel is blinded in part at this time, when the time of the gentile is fulfilled., ALL israel will repent and be saved.

And this is what Paul goes on to prove throughout the chapter. It's not the natural descendants of Abraham who are God's children, but the [chosen] children of promise. And God elected Jacob and rejected Esau in eternity before they did anything good or bad. This passage proves that God's sovereign decrees are not contingent on any of his creatures' desires, will or actions.

No, that is just one of pauls arguments concerning Israel and God chosing them, He did not chose them to be saved (as the jews in this day proclaimed) he chose them for a purpose (see the first 5 verses)

But you NRs can't use the context of Romans 9 itself, can you?

But I did. and will continue to do so.

You won't and can't because it demolishes your "free will" presuppositions. Romans 9 doesn't have God peering into his cosmic crystal ball checking out who is naughty and nice according to their future behavior, does it? Romans 9 is a wrecking ball that devastates NR heresies!

sorry my friend, God did not condemn a fetus to hell before it was born.. You want to show some anger, show it at those who taught you this thinking.

 

[FollowerofShiloh]

Thanks, you just reinforced my argument. ALL HUMANITY persists in their sin. Man cannot fix himself. There's no difference in principle between what God did to the NON-ELECT nations by driving them out the Land and what he did in eternity past with all non-elect people throughout the world by consigning them to eternal damnation. Since you, evidently, don't believe God was a murderer in using the Israelites to exterminate pagans from the Land, then neither is a God a murderer for consigning all non-elect to eternal punishment.

God gave his elect nation Israel the Land to inhabit-- a type of Restored Eden -- for it was a land flowing with milk and honey.

P.S. Mankind CANNOT change its nature, anymore than God can change his. You have this fantasy in your head that there is some "good" in mankind that enables him to fix himself.

The point I made went over your head. The Amalekites were considered a form of Nephilim. They represent sin itself. We should stop discussing this because you're off on a Reformed tangent and have no idea the real reason why God had these people killed. Nephilim, hence Flood of Noah...

 

[Rufus]

Cannot address the scripture....AGAIN....so instead you try to make it all about me

Thanks but I don't need/want your attention. I am sure you know what scripture I referenced below: John 3:16.

The Bible says For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.

The reformed state that God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son so that whomever God chooses should not perish but have everlasting life.

Strangely enough, the actual and ONLY people God has chosen are the Jews.

Predestination, according to the reformed, means that you basically had no choice and God decided you would be saved in spite of yourself.

Predestination according to scripture, means that once you are a follower of Christ, you are then predestined to have eternal life and follow Christ during your earthly life.

The reformed will tell you that God ordained that your child would be killed by a car because they did not look both ways before crossing a busy road.

The Bible states that sin has entered this world and we all suffer because of it. God did not kill your child; your child had the option to look both ways, God did not force him/her to look straight ahead and be killed.

You're making Jn 3:16 say way too much. God cannot possibly love each and every person in the world because numerous other scriptures say otherwise.

Furthermore, you don't understand predestination whatsoever. Predestination does NOT follow sinners' choice to follow Christ. You have that backwards, as well.

And you don't want to understand that your analogy is lame because it's unbiblical. For a biblical analogy, see my 4522.

When we came into this world none of us had any option to become anything but we inherited from Adam: a sinful nature, therefore a sinner! We came into this world DEAD in our trespasses and sins (Eph 2:1, 5) AND in the uncircumcision of our hearts (Col 2:13). What part of DEAD, don't you understand? Yet, you keep on portraying dead people as having the power of choice -- as though it's in their power to will themselves to life! This akin to saying that a barrel full of rotten apples has the inherent power to change themselves into good apples! Yet, scripture teaches that we are helpless, powerless sinners (Mat 9:36; Rom 4:6). Scripture does not portray the human race as a small child who knows better -- is conscious and aware of better, but didn't do it. Dead people have no consciousness or awareness or power of ability.

 

[Rufus]

I disagree. When you quote somethign that someone said,. then take them out of context of what they origionally said. you are in error.


Again, I disagree, The former is a fact. So is the latter.. the latter is a fact. Both speaking of the nation of Israel.


This again is in error. The fist 5 verses brings us the context of the passage. its about Israel. Not induviduals.. In fact the whole 3 chapters are about this in context.


It did not fail. why? Paul answered that in romans 11. Although Israel is blinded in part at this time, when the time of the gentile is fulfilled., ALL israel will repent and be saved.


No, that is just one of pauls arguments concerning Israel and God chosing them, He did not chose them to be saved (as the jews in this day proclaimed) he chose them for a purpose (see the first 5 verses)


But I did. and will continue to do so.


sorry my friend, God did not condemn a fetus to hell before it was born.. You want to show some anger, show it at those who taught you this thinking.

First of Paul didn't do that. He didn't take Mal 1:2 out of context, rather he expanded on its spiritual, eternal meaning. Show me in Mal 1:2 where election is in sight in that passage.

 

[Everlasting-Grace]

First of Paul didn't do that. He didn't take Mal 1:2 out of context, rather he expanded on its spiritual, eternal meaning. Show me in Mal 1:2 where election is in sight in that passage.

Your right he did not.

God chose Israel (Jacob) malichi said Jacob (Israel) he loved but esau (edom) he hated..

There is Paul proving God did not make a mistake chosing Israel.

he Chose Jacob to be the father, unlike the world order. which Esau would have been the one who the promise went to.

That is the argument paul is making

 

[FollowerofShiloh]

2 specific people God claims to hate/harden and we can read why He would + a group who is temporary blinded for the sake of Gentiles. and suddenly claims of God hating multiple people is made.

1 claim of hatred
1 claim of rejection
1 claim of hardening

Millions of names listed and only 3 accounts of what's being claimed.
It's literally not even a full 1% of all the names listed in the Bible but for SOME PEOPLE that equals 75% of creation.

The ignorance is real and alive and it breathes...

 

[Rufus]

Your right he did not.

God chose Israel (Jacob) malichi said Jacob (Israel) he loved but esau (edom) he hated..

There is Paul proving God did not make a mistake chosing Israel.

he Chose Jacob to be the father, unlike the world order. which Esau would have been the one who the promise went to.

That is the argument paul is making

No that is not the argument Paul is making. NATIONS are not in sight in Roman 9, anymore than election is in view in Mal 1:2. Another way we know nations are not in sight in Rom 9 is because later on in Rom 11 Paul talks about Gentiles who are currently God's elect -- and these Gentiles come from numerous nations. But at the same time, in a different sense, from one nation -- the Church. God no longer has two distinct people. He has under this NC ONE PEOPLE; for the elect among the Gentile nations have been grafted into the cultivated vine ( the elect of Israel).

But this wasn't case back in the day of Jacob and Esau. He made them into TWO DISTINCT nations -- one elect, one not. What Paul is doing in Rom 9 is explaining how that plan spiritually fits into this NC economy terms of the Gentiles of the world..

 

[Rufus]

2 specific people God claims to hate/harden and we can read why He would + a group who is temporary blinded for the sake of Gentiles. and suddenly claims of God hating multiple people is made.

1 claim of hatred
1 claim of rejection
1 claim of hardening

Millions of names listed and only 3 accounts of what's being claimed.
It's literally not even a full 1% of all the names listed in the Bible but for SOME PEOPLE that equals 75% of creation.

The ignorance is real and alive and it breathes...

Your post is totally incoherent. I for one have no idea what you're trying to say here.