John MacArthur Predestination question from 2010 Shepherd's Conference - YouTube - this is more in such a short time - then i could explain
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
E
There are two interpritations.
One is calvanistic view. God predestines people to heaven and hell.
One is another view (I Hold) Paul is showing how God chose Isreal as a nation. not based on will of men, or any work they had done. But based on his promise alone. Answering the question. Did God Fail at chosing Isreal?
if you would like I can take you through this. I did some earlier I think, but did not go into much detail. Let me know and I will walk you through what I believe.
One is calvanistic view. God predestines people to heaven and hell.
One is another view (I Hold) Paul is showing how God chose Isreal as a nation. not based on will of men, or any work they had done. But based on his promise alone. Answering the question. Did God Fail at chosing Isreal?
if you would like I can take you through this. I did some earlier I think, but did not go into much detail. Let me know and I will walk you through what I believe.
If you could go through verse by verse and explain how the following passage doesn't show God's sovereign choice (which ironically is the title given to the chapter by the NIV) I'd definitely be interested in reading it.
About God choosing Israel as a nation... the New Testament Israel IS Christianity, correct? (We are now Israel.) So in saying that this verse speaks of how God chose Israel the nation, you would in fact also be saying that this is how he chooses his Church - his children. Because the nation of Israel was a type/shadow of the Church. What are your thoughts?
14 What then shall we say? Is God unjust? Not at all! 15 For he says to Moses, "I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion." 16 It does not, therefore, depend on man's desire or effort, but on God's mercy. 17 For the Scripture says to Pharaoh: "I raised you up for this very purpose, that I might display my power in you and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth." 18 Therefore God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden. 19 One of you will say to me: "Then why does God still blame us? For who resists his will?" 20 But who are you, O man, to talk back to God? "Shall what is formed say to him who formed it, 'Why did you make me like this?' " 21 Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for noble purposes and some for common use? 22 What if God, choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objects of his wrath--prepared for destruction? 23 What if he did this to make the riches of his glory known to the objects of his mercy, whom he prepared in advance for glory-- 24 even us, whom he also called, not only from the Jews but also from the Gentiles?
About God choosing Israel as a nation... the New Testament Israel IS Christianity, correct? (We are now Israel.) So in saying that this verse speaks of how God chose Israel the nation, you would in fact also be saying that this is how he chooses his Church - his children. Because the nation of Israel was a type/shadow of the Church. What are your thoughts?
14 What then shall we say? Is God unjust? Not at all! 15 For he says to Moses, "I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion." 16 It does not, therefore, depend on man's desire or effort, but on God's mercy. 17 For the Scripture says to Pharaoh: "I raised you up for this very purpose, that I might display my power in you and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth." 18 Therefore God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden. 19 One of you will say to me: "Then why does God still blame us? For who resists his will?" 20 But who are you, O man, to talk back to God? "Shall what is formed say to him who formed it, 'Why did you make me like this?' " 21 Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for noble purposes and some for common use? 22 What if God, choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objects of his wrath--prepared for destruction? 23 What if he did this to make the riches of his glory known to the objects of his mercy, whom he prepared in advance for glory-- 24 even us, whom he also called, not only from the Jews but also from the Gentiles?
E
we can't start there, we have to start at vs 1 and get complete context. I can start in the middle of any passage and make it say whatever I want.
Rom 9 Paul starts a new subject different than the first 8 chapters. We will not find out what the verses you want to discuss unless we look at context of the whole. plus there are some other laws of proper hermenuetics we must look at
Rom 9 Paul starts a new subject different than the first 8 chapters. We will not find out what the verses you want to discuss unless we look at context of the whole. plus there are some other laws of proper hermenuetics we must look at
E
ok to start with. Historical context. Lets put ourselves back to the origional readers of the letter.
What was the mindset of jews at this time. What were they telling the gentiles. And what most likely were the gentiles thinking about what these jews were saying which it appears the OT would support? About what the church was proclaiming which apposed them. And about God chosing Israel. Since they evidently did not do anything that God wanted them to do?
E
If you could explain your thoughts on it, that would be great! 
Anyway My thought.
Isreal teaching:
1. They got an automatic in. God gave them the law. God gave them the means, and by blood. they are it.
2. God chose them based on the RIGHTEOUSNESS of their forefathers.
3. If Gentiles want in, They must follow the commands given to Israel. or they have no hope.
Gentile thinking.
1. OT seems to support Isreal. god did give them all these laws. They must have the right way, who are these people who are apposing them with a NEW thing and who is right.
2. If these new people are right. God chose Israel and gave them all these things yet they in their whole history despised gods laws, Mocked his grace. Crucified his (their) messiah, and did nothing God wanted them to. Did God make a mistake choosing Israel in the first place?? Why would God chose a people who would never walk in his way?
E
Well its good you asked about Israel. Since the nation of Israel is the context of romans 9 - 11 (see vs 1-6 of romans 9)
However, Gods choosing the nation of Isreal never meant anyone was saved correct? is this not one of Pauls arguments?
The thing I am trying to get, What questions is or are he trying to answer in his letter?
God's choosing the nation of Israel is a shadow of God's choosing the church. So the way he chose Israel is a shadow of the way he chose the Church.
That's really all I have energy for... I understand your desire to make sure this chapter is in the proper context. I think we're on the same page as far as who Paul is speaking to. I feel that the context of Romans 9 still accurately represents God's nature in how he deals with his People, whether they were OT Israel or NT Israel. He is the same. Unchanging. The entire purpose of having a "chosen people" in the OT was to point us to Christ and the NT Church (which is now Israel).
That's really all I have energy for... I understand your desire to make sure this chapter is in the proper context. I think we're on the same page as far as who Paul is speaking to. I feel that the context of Romans 9 still accurately represents God's nature in how he deals with his People, whether they were OT Israel or NT Israel. He is the same. Unchanging. The entire purpose of having a "chosen people" in the OT was to point us to Christ and the NT Church (which is now Israel).
E
It is? The true church has been saved the same way since adam first sinned. So I am not sure what your trying to say here.
Well. I look at it this way.
Did God chose isreal because of the righteousness of the fathers? No Paul explains this
Did He make a mistake chosing Isreal (Has the word of God taken no effect)? No. Paul explains this
Are the Jews right, and is being a jew by birth an automatic in? No. Paul explains this.
If we look at romans 9 - 11 by answering these questions. We will come up with a completely different interpretation.
Sorry, I tried to start with you getting context. Then I could look at the particular passages.. And explain the answers in this context.
Well. I look at it this way.
Did God chose isreal because of the righteousness of the fathers? No Paul explains this
Did He make a mistake chosing Isreal (Has the word of God taken no effect)? No. Paul explains this
Are the Jews right, and is being a jew by birth an automatic in? No. Paul explains this.
If we look at romans 9 - 11 by answering these questions. We will come up with a completely different interpretation.
Sorry, I tried to start with you getting context. Then I could look at the particular passages.. And explain the answers in this context.
If we start with questions - it is human nature to look for an answer
“Without waiting passively, for repetitions to impress or impose regularities upon us, we actively try to impose regularities on the world. We try to discover similarities in it, and to interpret it in terms of laws invented by us. Without waiting for premises, we jump to conclusions - Karl Popper
A plain reading vs. starting with questions
If you look at this you will see something, but if I ask you a question before you look, say Do you see the young lady, you will actively look for the young lady. In this case there is both an old and young lady.
Same thing with scripture - we usually start with a worldview outside of Scripture, but we renew our mind to conform to the Biblical Worldview. I used to hold a more free will theology, and as time went on, my mind was renewed out of that
Last edited:
E
That is the problem.
Do we interpret scripture as the people the letter was origionally written to interpret it?
or do we interpret it wiht as you say a worldview in mind?
Every one of pauls letters were written to different churches in the region who had induvidual problems in their churches. He exposed the problems, The false teachings. and gave answers to what God wanted him to answer (inspired word)
So should we not see what the problems facing the roman church are, which caused these three chapters to be written?
I truly belief failure to do so will lead to a world view. And even though you MAY get it right, you risk getting it wrong.
Do we interpret scripture as the people the letter was origionally written to interpret it?
or do we interpret it wiht as you say a worldview in mind?
Every one of pauls letters were written to different churches in the region who had induvidual problems in their churches. He exposed the problems, The false teachings. and gave answers to what God wanted him to answer (inspired word)
So should we not see what the problems facing the roman church are, which caused these three chapters to be written?
I truly belief failure to do so will lead to a world view. And even though you MAY get it right, you risk getting it wrong.
E
Thats the problem. How would we know which one is doing this, Unless we KNOW what the people he wrote to would have thought?
You all keep making these excuses. But the same excuses could be used against your interpretation.
Instead of arguing who is not doing this. Would it not be better to see what Paul said.
Also. Paul's writtings were inspired. Are you saying he wrote the world view and not Gods?
You all keep making these excuses. But the same excuses could be used against your interpretation.
Instead of arguing who is not doing this. Would it not be better to see what Paul said.
Also. Paul's writtings were inspired. Are you saying he wrote the world view and not Gods?