Understanding God’s election

[studier]

Did you happen to notice in the Psalms you quoted that they're directed to God's Saints!?

Sure. Who do you think they were in OC times when everybody was supposedly absolutely dead and had no ability to have faith in or to love God by keeping His commandments and not bowing to idols?

.S. And if unregenerate sinners have all this natural love for God (in their own way, of course like Paul), why would He need to circumcise anyone's hardened, calloused heart to get them to love Him in the biblical way!

16 "Therefore circumcise the foreskin of your heart, and be stiff-necked no longer. (Deut. 10:16 NKJ)

4 Circumcise yourselves to the LORD, And take away the foreskins of your hearts, You men of Judah and inhabitants of Jerusalem, Lest My fury come forth like fire, And burn so that no one can quench it, Because of the evil of your doings." (Jer. 4:4 NKJ)

Circumcision of heart was not a new concept, just as obedience and love and faith were not new concepts. Your TULIP blindness doesn't allow you to realize this.

The NC version of all of these things is the finalized version in Christ in Spirit taking us into eternity in Him. But you err in the unbiblical extent to which you take spiritual death.

You've surmised that I'm back to not reading all of your posts. There's just too much nonsense in them. In this quoted post I read the beginning and the end.

 

[studier]

the gentiles who heard rejoiced and believed, all who were appointed to eternal life.

I promised a response to this. There are several interpretive issues in this verse. It's a lot of typing to bring out all these issues. One of the things I'll point out before providing a link to an article that IMO does a good job discussing the issues is the 2 definitions for the word translated as "appointed" (tassō) that you've asked about:

Bauer-Danker, Greek-English Lexicon of the NT (BDAG)​

​

[BDAG] τάσσω (tassō)​

​

1. to bring about an order of things by arranging, arrange, put in place​

​

2. to give instructions as to what must be done, order, fix, determine, appoint​

Just from these 2 definitions we can see there can be a couple different meanings of the verse.

Please not that this verse is speaking in the context of one week after Paul has given his very comprehensive evangelistic message to both Jews and to God-fearing Gentiles.

I have more thoughts, but this article brings out some or many of the interpretive issues in the language.

 

[Rufus]

You may be an anomaly who was a rebel in the womb, but I doubt it. You were born innocent and the kingdom of God belonged to such as you were at birth, but you strayed since (apo) the innocence you had in the womb, learning to speak lies.

There's no text in scripture that teaches that man comes into this world in a state of innocence or moral/spiritual neutrality. That's your personal piece of fiction.

 

[studier]

Yahweh had made Himself known > the 7,000 men believed in Yahweh > because they believed in Yahweh the 7000 did not bow to Baal > God graciously chose to keep them alive for Himself through the sword judgment because they believed in Him, not because they did not physically bow to Baal, although their not bowing was an expression of, or evidence of, their faith in God.

Since the sword is intended for those that bow, to Baal, and 7000 did not < because Yahweh had made Himself known, those that did bow to Baal decided (choosing between options) that Baal as the only option worthy of believing in (which by implication is rejecting Yahweh's revelation of Himself).

As we tighten this up working it backwards and forwards, it's very easy to see how much effort @Rufus exerts to reverse the flow of the Text.

IMO this is one of the more important inflexion points in his efforts.

Another is his clear disregard for faith existing in some men since Abel as Heb11 makes vividly clear.

 

[Rufus]

Sure. Who do you think they were in OC times when everybody was supposedly absolutely dead and had no ability to have faith in or to love God by keeping His commandments and not bowing to idols?



16 "Therefore circumcise the foreskin of your heart, and be stiff-necked no longer. (Deut. 10:16 NKJ)

4 Circumcise yourselves to the LORD, And take away the foreskins of your hearts, You men of Judah and inhabitants of Jerusalem, Lest My fury come forth like fire, And burn so that no one can quench it, Because of the evil of your doings." (Jer. 4:4 NKJ)

Circumcision of heart was not a new concept, just as obedience and love and faith were not new concepts. Your TULIP blindness doesn't allow you to realize this.

The NC version of all of these things is the finalized version in Christ in Spirit taking us into eternity in Him. But you err in the unbiblical extent to which you take spiritual death.

You've surmised that I'm back to not reading all of your posts. There's just too much nonsense in them. In this quoted post I read the beginning and the end.

Apparently you're a stranger to SPIRITUAL CIRCUMCISION. The command that God gave the Israelites to circumcise their own hearts did not, historically, work out very well for them because they were unable to comply; thus God promised to do FOR THEM what they could not do for themselves. And of course, this command of God given to Israel was not the first impossible command to obey in scripture. We have that "little item" known as the Law of Moses which Israel was required to keep perfectly all the time under all circumstances. I seem to recall scripture teaching somewhere that God provided a fix for that as well. Anymore gems of wisdom you have for us?

 

[Rufus]

As we tighten this up working it backwards and forwards, it's very easy to see how much effort @Rufus exerts to reverse the flow of the Text.

IMO this is one of the more important inflexion points in his efforts.

Another is his clear disregard for faith existing in some men since Abel as Heb11 makes vividly clear.

Another bald-faced lie! Those of the Reformed Tradition do not disavow the existence of genuine faith in the hearts of OT believers. What we do disavow, however, is that the OT saints manufactured that faith in themselves. We recognize and acknowledge that ALL God's saints throughout the ages have been saved by God's grace through HIS gift of faith!

 

[studier]

Apparently you're a stranger to SPIRITUAL CIRCUMCISION

Not at all.

 

[Rufus]

Not at all.

Yeah, you are. You very likely believe that you circumcised your own heart and made yourself fit for God's favor. After all, did you ever grant permission to God to perform that spiritual surgery on your heart? If you didn't, then this would mean that that mean-spirited, power-hungry, glory-seeking Physician forced you to go under his knife. And I know you could never be thankful to Him for saving your miserable, wretched, spiritually-impoverished and unsound life by taking matters into his own hands! God forbid!!!

 

[studier]

Those of the Reformed Tradition do not disavow the existence of genuine faith in the hearts of OT believers

Yet every time I point out faith from Abel on, you've ignored it in favor of your view of disgusting perverse hateful mankind...

What we do disavow, however, is that the OT saints manufactured that faith in themselves. We recognize and acknowledge that ALL God's saints throughout the ages have been saved by God's grace through HIS gift of faith!

A gift you assert but cannot prove. Nor has any scholar for or against this merry-go-round argument.

We're discussing with you, Rufus, and you're very clearly changing Scripture.

 

[studier]

Yeah, you are.

See post #10,017.

 

[Rufus]

Yet every time I point out faith from Abel on, you've ignored it in favor of your view of disgusting perverse hateful mankind...



A gift you assert but cannot prove. Nor has any scholar for or against this merry-go-round argument.

We're discussing with you, Rufus, and you're very clearly changing Scripture.

Nor have you proved that Abel conjured up his own faith! In fact, since Abel had a fallen human nature just like all Adam's progeny, then you need to explain how Abel was able to please God (i.e. come to faith) when those in the flesh cannot please him, since the mind set on the flesh is hostile towards God. How could Abel pull that off when there is NO GOOD thing in the flesh (human nature). How did Able, born a bad tree, wind up bearing the good fruit of faith? And I don't recall Jesus making an exception for Abel when he said said that no man is good; but only God alone is good!

 

[Rufus]

See post #10,017.

What about it? That's PT's very short post.

 

[studier]

Nor have you proved that Abel conjured up his own faith!

You're making the claim that God must give fallen humanity Faith. So, prove it.

Start with Abel. What do you see in the Genesis story? What did the Hebrews writer say Abel had Faith? Or start wherever you like with Scripture with your usual diversions.

 

[studier]

See post #10,017.

Typo. Thanks. 10,107.

 

[Rufus]

You're making the claim that God must give fallen humanity Faith. So, prove it.

Start with Abel. What do you see in the Genesis story? What did the Hebrews writer say Abel had Faith? Or start wherever you like with Scripture with your usual diversions.

I interpret scripture with scripture and, unlike you, I avoid contradictions. Do you deny that Abel had a sin nature?

Or what about Eve? God reconciled her to himself on what basis? What did Eve do to merit that kind of favor with God?

 

[Rufus]

Typo. Thanks. 10,107.

In which you said, "No, not at all."

 

[studier]

I interpret scripture with scripture and, unlike you, I avoid contradictions. Do you deny that Abel had a sin nature?

No. Men under sin and death can believe in God especially when God seems to be there talking with Abel. Just like men under sin and death could maintain their orientation to God and not bow to Baal. Just like men could be living the faith of Moses and be awaiting Messiah when He came. Etc., etc., etc.,

 

[Rufus]

No. Men under sin and death can believe in God especially when God seems to be there talking with Abel. Just like men under sin and death could maintain their orientation to God and not bow to Baal. Just like men could be living the faith of Moses and be awaiting Messiah when He came. Etc., etc., etc.,

Since you acknowledge that Abel had a sin nature, then explain to us how any good could have come forth from that evil nature. How did a bad tree bear the good fruit of faith?

 

[Mem]

Since you acknowledge that Abel had a sin nature, then explain to us how any good could have come forth from that evil nature. How did a bad tree bear the good fruit of faith?

Without regard to the source of its origin, I think we would all agree that faith brought forth good fruit in Abel, and specifically faith in Christ since Abel likely heard Adam and Eve's account of God's word even if he, Abel, didn't hear from God Himself. But scripture clearly lets us know that Cain, himself, did hear directly from God, i.e. "if you do well...but if not, sin crouches...and its desire is for you..." but his, Cain's, deeds were fleshly, led by his jealousy or hatred or whatever physical emotion. Cain's work was not at all compelled by faith (which he would've done well to do) faith is spiritual in nature because one goes by that which one does not see when one walks by faith.
Why would waste time explaining to Cain, "IF you do well...then" if God was fully aware that Cain could not do well even if he'd wanted, i.e. willed, to? Cain paid homage to his own emotional desire to sin rather than to God's, and so sin owned him.

 

[PaulThomson]

Since you acknowledge that Abel had a sin nature, then explain to us how any good could have come forth from that evil nature. How did a bad tree bear the good fruit of faith?

Mat 7:18
A good tree (agathon dendron) is not able (ou dunatai: present tense) to bring keep on bringing forth (poiein: present infinitive, has a continuous present sense) evil fruit (ponErous karpous), neither (oude) [is able] a corrupt tree (sapron dendron) to keep on bringing forth (poiein: present infinitive, has a continuous present sense) good fruit (kalous karpous).

the verse clearly does not say that a good tree is only able to be bringing forth good fruit, nor that the evil tree is only able to be bringing forth evil fruit. The point Jesus is making is that good trees produce mostly good fruit, and the evil trees produce mostly evil fruit.

So anyone can do good sometimes. Even the pharisees could give good gifts sometimes, to people like their own children.