Understanding God’s election
- Thread starter dougcho
- Start date
-
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.
If the Calvinites were around back then they would be running around with their hair on fire screaming bloody murder "DON'T LOOK AT THAT THING". And then philosophize about how it would be a "work", an insult to grace, and doom them for eternity.
In other words, they would INSIST that the afflicted do the OPPOSITE of what was commanded.
Crazy huh? But yeah....that's how the nutter Calvinites roll.
In other words, they would INSIST that the afflicted do the OPPOSITE of what was commanded.
Crazy huh? But yeah....that's how the nutter Calvinites roll.
-
1
- Show all
Paul is employing the rhetorical device of the royal "we"! After all, he was himself a Jew, wasn't he? Furthermore, the term "Jews" itself isn't used in Rom 3:9! However, the inference you make is correct, since Paul himself was a Jew and is using "we" in the royal sense, which I will now prove by adding additional context.
The fact that he was not directly addressing the Jews can also be seen in 3:1-3,which reads:
Rom 3:1-3
3:1 What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision?
Notice he didn't say "what advantage then hath YOU Jews. Here he's asking a question about "the Jew".
2 Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God.
"Them" in the above text is a third person pronoun. A very odd pronoun to use if Paul had been directly addressing Jews. If he was addressing them directly, he would have used a second person pronoun, instead of a third person pronoun that speaks about rather than to them!
3 For what if some [Jews] did not believe? shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect?
KJV
Here again, we have the identical situation as in the previous verses. Paul did not say, "what if some of YOU Jews did not or do not believe? And part "b" of the verse strongly clinches this fact with another third person pronoun "their". Paul did not say, "shall YOUR unbelief make the faith of God without effect?" Plus he could have never said that since he was in fact writing to believers!
One of the chief hermeneutical errors that so many believers commit when interpreting scripture is that we fail to take ourselves out of our present, 21st century circumstances and modern culture, which are thousands of years removed from the actual historical context that will be accompanied, invariably, with useless, unnecessary and damaging presuppositions, and instead consciously place ourselves into the shoes of the ancient original audience to see how they would have understood the ancient writer. We often fail to ask two extremely important questions: What did the ancient writer mean and how would his original audience have understood him? By failing to consciously adopt these highly and critically important hermeneutical principles for ourselves every time we approach the Word of God, we will almost inevitably be led far astray and misunderstand the passage under consideration. (A large passage that immediately comes to mind and is very often handled in the most irresponsible and careless manner possible is the Mount Olivet Discourse. If we students of God's Word would only place ourselves into Jesus' original first century audience (which in this case would be in the shoes of Peter, John, James and Andrew (Mk 13:3), we could never in a million years embrace the serious eschatological errors proffered by Dispensationalism and even other schools of eschatology. But I digress...Back to the immediate subject at hand.)
So...I implore you to personally adopt these two critically important hermeneutical principles and place yourself into Paul's original audience in the church in Rome. First, Paul was most defintely writing to believers (Rom 1:7). But what kind of believers: Jews, Gentiles or a mixed bag of both? Verse 11 answers this importan question to wit:
Rom 1:13
13 I do not want you to be unaware, brothers, that I planned many times to come to you (but have been prevented from doing so until now) in order that I might [currently] have a harvest among you, just as I have had among the OTHER Gentiles [in the past].
NIV
Key Takeaways from the above verse:
1. Paul confirms he's addressing saints with the term "brothers".
2. Paul addreses these saints directly by using the second person personal pronoun "you" twice.
3. Lastly, Paul unmistakably and irrefutably addresses these "brothers" as being Gentile believers because he considered them to also be Gentiles.
So...do this: Pretend you're part of Paul's original audience and you're a Jewish believer. Would you not be insulted by Paul writing to YOU, thinking that you are another Gentile believer? Paul must have been thinking that or esle why would he consider you to be just like one of his Gentile believers to whom he ministered in the past? The term "other" makes absolutely no sense unless the apostle considered his original audience [you] to be just another Gentile audience to whom he is currently minstering through his letter.
Was Paul confused regarding the identity of his original audience? Or are you confused?
The fact that he was not directly addressing the Jews can also be seen in 3:1-3,which reads:
Rom 3:1-3
3:1 What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision?
Notice he didn't say "what advantage then hath YOU Jews. Here he's asking a question about "the Jew".
2 Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God.
"Them" in the above text is a third person pronoun. A very odd pronoun to use if Paul had been directly addressing Jews. If he was addressing them directly, he would have used a second person pronoun, instead of a third person pronoun that speaks about rather than to them!
3 For what if some [Jews] did not believe? shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect?
KJV
Here again, we have the identical situation as in the previous verses. Paul did not say, "what if some of YOU Jews did not or do not believe? And part "b" of the verse strongly clinches this fact with another third person pronoun "their". Paul did not say, "shall YOUR unbelief make the faith of God without effect?" Plus he could have never said that since he was in fact writing to believers!
One of the chief hermeneutical errors that so many believers commit when interpreting scripture is that we fail to take ourselves out of our present, 21st century circumstances and modern culture, which are thousands of years removed from the actual historical context that will be accompanied, invariably, with useless, unnecessary and damaging presuppositions, and instead consciously place ourselves into the shoes of the ancient original audience to see how they would have understood the ancient writer. We often fail to ask two extremely important questions: What did the ancient writer mean and how would his original audience have understood him? By failing to consciously adopt these highly and critically important hermeneutical principles for ourselves every time we approach the Word of God, we will almost inevitably be led far astray and misunderstand the passage under consideration. (A large passage that immediately comes to mind and is very often handled in the most irresponsible and careless manner possible is the Mount Olivet Discourse. If we students of God's Word would only place ourselves into Jesus' original first century audience (which in this case would be in the shoes of Peter, John, James and Andrew (Mk 13:3), we could never in a million years embrace the serious eschatological errors proffered by Dispensationalism and even other schools of eschatology. But I digress...Back to the immediate subject at hand.)
So...I implore you to personally adopt these two critically important hermeneutical principles and place yourself into Paul's original audience in the church in Rome. First, Paul was most defintely writing to believers (Rom 1:7). But what kind of believers: Jews, Gentiles or a mixed bag of both? Verse 11 answers this importan question to wit:
Rom 1:13
13 I do not want you to be unaware, brothers, that I planned many times to come to you (but have been prevented from doing so until now) in order that I might [currently] have a harvest among you, just as I have had among the OTHER Gentiles [in the past].
NIV
Key Takeaways from the above verse:
1. Paul confirms he's addressing saints with the term "brothers".
2. Paul addreses these saints directly by using the second person personal pronoun "you" twice.
3. Lastly, Paul unmistakably and irrefutably addresses these "brothers" as being Gentile believers because he considered them to also be Gentiles.
So...do this: Pretend you're part of Paul's original audience and you're a Jewish believer. Would you not be insulted by Paul writing to YOU, thinking that you are another Gentile believer? Paul must have been thinking that or esle why would he consider you to be just like one of his Gentile believers to whom he ministered in the past? The term "other" makes absolutely no sense unless the apostle considered his original audience [you] to be just another Gentile audience to whom he is currently minstering through his letter.
Was Paul confused regarding the identity of his original audience? Or are you confused?
I was never a big fan of the TULIP and the like, because they give the impression that Calvinistic theology is all about predestination, when that's just a feature of their pietism towards the absolute sovereignty of God. I have a few tomes of Biblical Theology and Reformed Dogmatics, they actually talk about a broad array of features relevant to the Christian worldview, not just election and reprobation.
I also read Lutherans and Thomas Aquinas. To me, treating them the same way would be assuming Lutheranism is all about communion and indulgences, while Thomas wrote about nothing but Mary and angels. These were objects of controversy specifically addressed, but not the central features of their work.
I also read Lutherans and Thomas Aquinas. To me, treating them the same way would be assuming Lutheranism is all about communion and indulgences, while Thomas wrote about nothing but Mary and angels. These were objects of controversy specifically addressed, but not the central features of their work.
-
1
-
1
- Show all
Not only that but the Serpent on the Pole is Typology! It didn't even involve spiritual salvation but physical salvation that pointed to future eternal, spiritual salvation through Christ under the New Covenant. I wrote a post once about that incident. When I find it, I'll beam it up.
-
1
-
1
- Show all
Anyone who looked upon the serpent was protected from the serpents.
Numbers 21:8-9
And the Lord said to Moses, “Make a fiery serpent, and set it on a pole; and every one who is bitten, when he sees it,
shall live.” So Moses made a bronze serpent, and set it on a pole; and if a serpent bit any man, he would look at the
bronze serpent and live.
John 3:14
And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of man be lifted up.
"and if a serpent bit any man, he would look at the bronze serpent and live"
This nation was a rebellious nation and even Moses rebelled.
Yet the Lord had compassion for the nation of Israel which was amplified when Christ, was Himself
lifted up. Jesus had compassion for His entire creation, any man, in fact.
Numbers 21:8-9
And the Lord said to Moses, “Make a fiery serpent, and set it on a pole; and every one who is bitten, when he sees it,
shall live.” So Moses made a bronze serpent, and set it on a pole; and if a serpent bit any man, he would look at the
bronze serpent and live.
John 3:14
And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of man be lifted up.
"and if a serpent bit any man, he would look at the bronze serpent and live"
This nation was a rebellious nation and even Moses rebelled.
Yet the Lord had compassion for the nation of Israel which was amplified when Christ, was Himself
lifted up. Jesus had compassion for His entire creation, any man, in fact.
-
2
- Show all
This was a good quotation in the link you provided.
"Ultimately, though, the answers to the lapsarian issue are best left up to God. Instead of worrying or arguing over when God decreed what, our concern should be on proclaiming the gospel of Jesus Christ to all who need to hear it."
1 Corinthians 2:1
When I came to you, brethren, I did not come proclaiming to you the testimony of God in lofty words or wisdom.
1 Corinthians 2:2
For I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ and him crucified.
1 Corinthians 4:20
For the kingdom of God does not consist in talk but in power.
Paul just summarized the doctrine of Christianity.
1 Corinthians 2:2
For I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ and him crucified.
Ultimately, Paul is saying only one name ever mattered.
Boast in Christ and in nothing else.
"Ultimately, though, the answers to the lapsarian issue are best left up to God. Instead of worrying or arguing over when God decreed what, our concern should be on proclaiming the gospel of Jesus Christ to all who need to hear it."
1 Corinthians 2:1
When I came to you, brethren, I did not come proclaiming to you the testimony of God in lofty words or wisdom.
1 Corinthians 2:2
For I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ and him crucified.
1 Corinthians 4:20
For the kingdom of God does not consist in talk but in power.
Paul just summarized the doctrine of Christianity.
1 Corinthians 2:2
For I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ and him crucified.
Ultimately, Paul is saying only one name ever mattered.
Boast in Christ and in nothing else.