Gym Debate: Romans 9 (Arminius_Wesley vs. Nang)

[Rayado]

Gym Debate Notice:

This debate thread is opened to debate the following issue:

The meaning of Paul's reference to Jacob & Esau, and his usage of the terms vessels of wrath & mercy.

Arminius_Wesley will be defending the positive and Nang will be defending the negative. This debate will begin as soon as Arminius_Wesley makes his first post. The debate will last five rounds.

From this point on, the only posts allowed in this thread are to be made by the participants and Moderators. All others will be deleted.

Spectator commentary is welcomed here.

If you are up and unable to meet your deadline please contact a moderator ASAP.
Please do not edit your post after this notice is posted.
If you are not a participant please feel free to participate in the commentary thread noted in the first post of this debate.

[bridgeforsale]

1 I am telling the truth in Christ, I am not lying, my conscience testifies with me in the Holy Spirit,
2that I have great sorrow and unceasing grief in my heart.
3For)I could wish that I myself were accursed, separated from Christ for the sake of my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh,
4who are Israelites, to whom belongs the adoption as sons, and the glory and the covenants and the giving of the Law and the temple service and the promises,
5whose are the fathers, and from whom is the Christ according to the flesh, who is over all, God blessed forever. Amen.
6But it is not as though the word of God has failed. For they are not all Israel who are descended from Israel;


Here we see Paul’s exhortations to Jewish converts to Christianity. We have to remember the backdrop to this letter. Paul had spent some time in Israel trying to convince the Christian fathers in Jerusalem of faith-based salvation. They still wanted to insist on circumcision for new Christians. In fact, while even these Christian leaders in Jerusalem acknowledged God’s plan was to save the world through Christ; they felt it must be on Jewish terms. Moreover, many of them didn’t feel the time was ripe to even evangelize beyond the Jewish community. They ended up with a compromise solution, which involved things like a ban on eating food that was offered to the idols. Many Jews were suspicious of Paul – they felt that he was preaching that the law has been eradicated (and ultimately that the law was never possible to adhere to anyway). In Paul’s construct they were losing their chosen status – under this new paradigm they were equals .... something they did not easily accept.

The last sentence of Paul’s opening statement tells us the topic of this chapter. Paul is set to show his Jewish audience from their own scriptures that blood descendency from Abraham does not demarcate the covenant people. The old covenant prophecy foretold the coming of Christ, the grafting in the gentiles, and the new covenant of faith.


Compare the following two sections:

Romans 9

6But it is not as though the word of God has failed For they are not all Israel who are descended from Israel; (here Paul begins by noting the concerns of his intended audience, who believed the word of God must fail if all Jews aren’t saved)

7nor are they all children because they are Abraham's descendants, but: "THROUGH ISAAC YOUR DESCENDANTS WILL BE NAMED."

8That is, it is not the children of the flesh who are children of God, but the children of the promise are regarded as descendants.

9For this is the word of promise: "AT THIS TIME I WILL COME, AND SARAH SHALL HAVE A SON."

Galatians 4

22For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman.

23But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise.

24Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar.

25For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children.

26But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all.

27For it is written, Rejoice, thou barren that bearest not; break forth and cry, thou that travailest not: for the desolate hath many more children than she which hath an husband.

28Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise.

As you can see Paul explains his use of allegory in Galatians 4. Paul is identifying the "children of the promise" or the "true Israel." Paul identifies the two women who Abraham bore children with as "representing two covenants." This is a CRITICAL point. One covenant is represented by the children of the flesh, which in Galatians 4 is represented by Ishmael. The other, the children of the promise, represented by Isaac. God elected the children of the promise. There are other important parts of this allegory, for example the fact that one son was born to a bondmaid (this is to represent the idea that Paul later introduces, the older shall serve the younger).


After Paul makes reference to the children of the promise he writes:

10 And not only this, but there was Rebekah also, when she had conceived twins by one man, our father Isaac;

Note the words I bolded, AND NOT ONLY THIS. Here Paul is telling the reader that this allegorical message continues. Then Paul writes:

11 for though the twins were not yet born and had not done anything good or bad, so that God's purpose according to His choice would stand, not because of works but because of Him who calls,

12it was said to her, "THE OLDER WILL SERVE THE YOUNGER."

13Just as it is written, ")JACOB I LOVED, BUT ESAU I HATED."

14What shall we say then? There is no injustice with God, is there? May it never be!


Paul is amplifying the point he made by his reference of Isaac and Ishmael. And not only this, but also another example is Jacob and Esau.

The phrase "the older will serve the younger" has obvious meaning. The old covenant shall serve the new covenant. The old covenant was always designed by God to lay the groundwork for Christ (this is what Paul is explaining to the reader). If no one were conscience of the existence of sin; no one would have realized they needed Christ. This was the intent of the law. It was never designed to demarcate the covenant people of God; it was intended for destruction all along. Paul shows that this is really what the Old Testament is saying.

Right after explaining to the reader the true meaning of these Old Testament allegories Paul uses the rhetorical style of anticipating an objection WHAT SHALL WE SAY THEN.

The section that directly follows the discourse of Jacob & Esau is Paul answering anticipated objections to his previous discourse. He’s answering questions like: why did God choose Jacob over Esau and the children of the promise over the children of the flesh, Esau didn't deserve this treatment since the choice was made before either him or his brother did anything good or bad? This is unfair; it's unjust? Paul responds by saying:


15For He says to Moses, "I WILL HAVE MERCY ON WHOM I HAVE MERCY, AND I WILL HAVE COMPASSION ON WHOM I HAVE COMPASSION."


16So then it does not depend on the man who wills or the man who runs, but on God who has mercy.

Paul’s response here tells us our own willingness or desire to please God is inadequate. We cannot expect salvation on our terms, it can only occur on God’s terms. It’s God who has mercy after all, it’s God who decides which individuals or groups to either harden or have mercy on. God has decided by eternal decree to have mercy on those who have faith in Christ. This verse is not referring to free will. It is referring to our will as opposed to God’s will.

The Pharisees thought their works were pleasing to God. However, nothing could have been further from the truth. They were hypocrites and passed harsh judgment on the least of men within their society. They loved no one and alienated all who didn’t aspire to their pomp. They used the law in an awful way. They used it to prop up themselves, to enable them to boast at their mastery of it and superior ability to adhere to it. This was the inevitable fate of first covenant law, as we will see Paul reveal in just a moment. It was created to make the ground fertile for Christ and then for destruction.

God’s plan all along had Christ in view. The law was designed to be impossible to adhere to for most Jews. It was designed to make some Jews (of higher social status such as the Pharisees) judgmental. The constant indictment and chastisement of the sinners and lower class in Jewish society by the Pharisaic class stirred a yearning for redemption in the hearts of those sinners and poor beggars. These were to be the firstfruits of Christ. The first covenant law made these lower class Jews eager for their Savior; and they rushed to Him when He came.


Moving on:

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."[g] 18Therefore God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden.


Paul is using this story from Exodus to prove his earlier point; God chose to have mercy on those with faith in Christ. This verse is explaining to the reader how God works. Just like God decided to harden the Pharaoh to advance His plan for the Jewish people, He has chosen by eternal decree to have mercy on those with faith in Christ. It’s important to emphasize that this reference to the Pharaoh is merely illustrative of the point Paul is making. This is made apparent by the connector “Therefore” at the beginning of verse 18. Just like God made the inscrutable choice between Jacob and Esau He decided to harden the pharaoh to advance His elective purpose. This illustration is not revealing double predestination. Rather Paul is merely amplifying his earlier point. He is showing his Jewish audience from their own scriptures the inscrutable nature of the Gods judgments and choices.


19One of you will say to me: "Then why does God still blame us? For who resists his will?"


Here Paul is anticipating a Jewish question. Why does God still blame us? The “us” here is the Jewish people. The audience of primarily Jewish converts this is addressed to wants to know why their unbelieving kinsmen will not be saved. They wonder how anyone can resist God’s will to believe in Christ. Paul is explaining that Jewish unbelief is a necessary part of God’s plan. He continues

But indeed, O man, who are you to reply against God? Will the thing formed say to him who formed it, “Why have you made me like this?” 21 Does not the potter have power over the clay, from the same lump to make one vessel for honor and another for dishonor?


The term the same lump of clay can be traced back to Paul’s earlier reference to Rebekah. She is the lump of clay allegorically referred to and Jacob and Esau are representative of the vessels (the new and old covenants).


What if God, wanting to show His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, 23 and that He might make known the riches of His glory on the vessels of mercy, which He had prepared beforehand for glory,



Here Paul is hammering the message home. He is revealing God’s plan. God created the old covenant law to make known the riches of His glory on the vessels of mercy (believers in Christ) as explained above. The vessels of mercy are those grafted into the covenant of faith. Everything that came before was in preparation for Christ. God carefully laid the groundwork, in a complex plan that spanned back centuries.


even us whom He called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?

Paul is now preparing to reveal to his audience of Jewish converts that God in the Old Testament foretold the grafting in of the gentiles.

25 As He says also in Hosea:


“ I will call them My people, who were not My people,
And her beloved, who was not beloved.”
26 “ And it shall come to pass in the place where it was said to them,

‘ You are not My people,’
There they shall be called sons of the living God.”


Here is Paul citing the OT to show that God had always intended to graft in the gentiles.


27 Isaiah also cries out concerning Israel


“ Though the number of the children of Israel be as the sand of the sea,
The remnant will be saved.
28 For He will finish the work and cut it short in righteousness,
Because the LORD will make a short work upon the earth.”

29 And as Isaiah said before:


“ Unless the LORD of Sabaoth had left us a seed,
We would have become like Sodom,
And we would have been made like Gomorrah.”

Paul here is reiterating the point that God planned the entire covenant history of the Jewish people up to that point for the sole purpose of laying the groundwork for Christ. Had God not chosen the Jewish people for this important task He would have destroyed them for their disobedience as He did Sodom. However, God had longsuffering for the Jewish people because they were to carry forward the seed of Christ.

30 What shall we say then? That Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, have attained to righteousness, even the righteousness of faith; 31 but Israel, pursuing the law of righteousness, has not attained to the law of righteousness. 32 Why? Because they did not seek it by faith, but as it were, by the works of the law. For they stumbled at that stumbling stone. 33 As it is written:


“ Behold, I lay in Zion a stumbling stone and rock of offense,
And whoever believes on Him will not be put to shame.”

Paul closes by reiterating the focus of his entire letter to the Romans of faith based salvation. However, it is important to note that while God’s plan required that many Jews reject Christ (in order to carry out His purpose of spreading His name throughout the entire earth) they are not irrevocably doomed to damnation. They may repent:


But in a great house there are not only vessels of gold and silver, but also of wood and clay, some for honor and some for dishonor. 21 Therefore if anyone cleanses himself from the latter, he will be a vessel for honor, sanctified and useful for the Master, prepared for every good work (2 Timothy 2:18-21).


Moreover, in Romans 11 we learn that the Jews will ultimately be saved. Remember the words the first will be last and the last first. This is a reference to the order of salvation. The Jews, who are the vessels of wrath (at the moment), will be saved last.


Romans 11:11Again I ask: Did they stumble so as to fall beyond recovery? Not at all! Rather, because of their transgression, salvation has come to the Gentiles to make Israel envious. 12But if their transgression means riches for the world, and their loss means riches for the Gentiles, how much greater riches will their fullness bring!

The law was structured to produce the pharisaic attitudes common within the Jewish community. It produced a feeling of ethnic superiority based on a wrongfully perceived covenant relationship with God. This is a necessary element in God’s plan so that the original promise to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob would come to fruition – that all people in the world would be blessed through their seed.

[Nang]

My thanks to Arminius_Wesley for issuing a challenge for discussion and debate on Romans Chapter 9, and for accepting my offer to present a “Calvinist” commentary on this specific Scripture. I will take the position that this portion of the Word of God teaches unconditional election of actual, individual souls, based upon the sovereign will and eternal decrees of God, alone.

I am of the Protestant faith; Reformed in my beliefs; labeled “Calvinist” by others due to the fact I believe in the biblical doctrines of Election, and Predestination.

I also am what is called a “Supralapsarian,” in that I believe Sovereign God decreed to elect particular souls and predestined them to salvation, prior to the creation of the world and the fall of man.

“The term "supralapsarianism" comes from the Latin words supra and lapsus; the decree of predestination was considered to be "above" (supra) or logically "before" the decree concerning the fall (lapsus), while the infralapsarians viewed it as "below" (infra) or logically "after" the decree concerning the fall.”*

God decreed before He created the world, to elect a people in Christ, who would be made “accepted in the Beloved,” (Eph. 1:3-6). From this first decree issued forth the unilateral and everlasting Covenant of Grace established by Father, Son, and Holy Spirit; purposed to save an elect humanity (Genesis 17:7, 19), who were also decreed before time to be created in time, and thereby ordained to be fellow-heirs with Christ in the inheritance of the Kingdom of God. (Eph. 1:7-14)

Due to this Covenant of Grace, all men saved, whether during the O.T. era or the N.T. era, receive the mercies and salvation of God according to Divine election; worked through the free gift of God’s grace that gives men faith in the Covenant promises of the Savior; who is none other than the promised “Seed (Gen. 3:15);” the Word who became flesh (John 1:14); the God/Man Jesus Christ (Heb. 10:5; Phil. 2:8).

Scripture reveals election of particular individual souls whom the Father gave to the Son to save by acting in their stead as their federal head and representative during His incarnation. Jesus Christ fulfilled all the law on behalf of these same particular people (John 17:2), prayed only for these particular people (John 17:9); and suffered the vicarious death of these particular elect people on the cross (Romans 8:3); resurrecting from death so that these particular bodies might also resurrect to glory on the last day and know everlasting life. (John 5:21, 29).

These elect of God were loved by God, in Christ, and intimately foreknown, in Christ. And “. . .Whom He foreknew, He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the firstborn of many brethren. Moreover, whom He predestined, these He also called; whom He called, these He also justified; and whom He justified; these He also glorified.” Romans 8:29&30 These are the individual and elect souls who have been registered in heaven (Luke 10:20) and written by name in the Lamb’s Book of Life. (Rev. 21:27)

My Bible-study hermeneutics are based upon a confidence that the Holy Scriptures are the infallible, inerrant, and inspired Words of God; to be understood literally except in passages that are obviously and forcefully figurative, symbolic, parabolic, anthropomorphic, and/or allegorical. I hold to Sola Scriptura, which means the Holy Scriptures are my sole and final authority in matters of faith and practice. I also hold to Solus Christos (redemption comes through the Person and name of Jesus Christ, alone), Sola Gratia (according to the free gift of Godly grace, alone), Sola Fide (by faith in the righteousness of Christ, alone), and Soli Deo Gloria (to the glory of God, alone).

Before we begin our formal debate of five rounds, I would like to define a few biblical terms; which have various meanings to various persons; and which I will be employing in the following ways, to clarify my theological position. Perhaps this will help us from talking past each other :


“ISRAEL”

1. National people of God (Romans 9:1-5)
2. Spiritual people of God (Romans 4:9-25; 9:6-12, 27-29; 11:26,
3. The Lord Jesus Christ (Hosea 11:1, Matt. 2:15)

“CHURCH”

1. Visible, earthly, temporal, congregations and assemblies
2. Invisible, spiritual, eternal body of Christ (Heb 12:22-24)

“COVENANT”

1. Everlasting, unconditional, eternal covenant established unilaterally between Father, Son, and Holy Spirit before creation.

2. Various temporal, conditional, earthly, “old testament” covenants made between God and His creatures.

3. The “New Covenant” of salvation by grace, alone.

“GRACE”

Unmerited favor and pardon bestowed by God upon particular sinners, which always proves efficacious to the saving of the soul.

“SANCTIFICATION”

1. A setting apart of creatures by the power of God, that does not always save.
2. The “setting apart” unto holiness and salvation of every justified sinner.

“REGENERATION”

Spiritual resurrection to new life performed by the power of the Holy Spirit in the lives of particular sinners. (Being “born [again] from above”.) John 3:3


“JUSTIFICATION”

The legal ruling of forgiveness and pardon, decreed by God for those chosen in Christ before creation, whose sins were propitiated by the blood oblation of Christ on the cross, who are called and drawn to faith in Christ in their earthly lifetimes via the power of the Holy Spirit and the preaching of the Gospel.

“GOSPEL”

The “everlasting” good news of the Savior promised according to Everlasting Covenant that permeates the Scriptures in both the O.T. era as well as the N.T. era. Gospel = The Word of God = The Son of God = the Incarnation of Jesus Christ. The subject of the entire Bible.

I would also like to carefully define the usage of the word, “ELECTION,” according to Scripture, since it will be the focus of this discussion. The Hebrew word translated “elect,” or “chosen,” is “bachiyr” which means “choose; chosen one; elect.” The Greek word translated “elect,” or “chosen” is “eklektos,” or “ekloge” meaning “favorite, chosen, elect, chosen, or election.” (I have underlined two definitions of the original languages, that will support my forthcoming arguments.)

However, there is more than one aspect and application of the doctrine of Election revealed in the Bible, consequently, more than one usage of the word “elect”. I will list 5 that I know of:


1. There is reference to “elect” angels in I Timothy 5:21, I Cor. 6:3, II Peter 2:4, and Jude 6.

2. There is reference to “elect” service. David was chosen and anointed to serve the nation of Israel as King, by God (I Samuel 15:7-12) and Jesus Christ chose His disciples and Aposles to serve His ministry and purposes (Luke 6:13, John 6:70, 15:16, Acts 9:15, 15:7).

3. Abraham’s biological seed were “elected” to form the nation of Israel, and to typify in earthly form, the heavenly, invisible, and spiritual “church” of God. (Deut. 4:34, 7:6&7, 10:15, I Kings 3:8, Isa. 44:1&2; 45:4; 65:9,15,22; Amos 3:2; Acts 13:17; Romans 9:1-5).

4. Jesus Christ is declared the “Elect One” of God in Isaiah 42:1. The Apostle Luke refers to Christ as the “Chosen One” in Luke 9:35; 23:35, and Peter makes reference to His elect foreordination as Messiah in I Peter 1:20, and 2:6 (quoting Isa. 28:16).

5. The “election” of particular, individual persons unto salvation in Jesus Christ, which is taught most clearly in Ephesians 1:3-11 and Romans 8:28-11:36. These are the Scriptures that will take center stage in this debate.

I repeat my belief that the Election of Sovereign God is particular in nature; according to unconditional decree; producing everlasting life in individual sinners.

This, garnered not only from the Holy Scripture we are going to discuss, but also according to the definition of Election as put forth by the historical Reformed church in her creeds; clarified well by the Synod of Dordt, in answer to the error of the Remonstrants (followers of Arminius), which I quote:

“That some in time are given faith by God and that others are not given faith proceeds from His eternal decree" (1.6). Election is then defined as "the unchangeable purpose of God whereby, before the foundation of the world, out of the whole human race, which had fallen by its own fault out of its original integrity into sin and ruin, He has, according to the most free good pleasure of His will, out of mere grace, chosen in Christ to salvation a certain number of specific men, neither better nor more worthy than other, but with them involved in a common misery" (1.7).” Canons of Dordt, First Main Point, 1618-19

Hopefully, I will find occasion to delve into the essence and spiritual principles of this particular and Unconditional Election as we go through the five rounds of debate on this subject.

Meanwhile, here is a very brief outline of the Chapter in Romans we will discuss:

Romans 9:1-5: Paul laments over national Israel’s unrighteous service, unfaithfulness, and disobedience under the Law. The cause for this lament is detailed in Romans 9:30-33 . . .

“What shall we say then? That Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, have obtained to righteousness, even the righteousness of faith; but Israel, pursuing the law of righteousness, has not attained to the the law of righteousness. Why? Because they did not seek it by faith, but as it were, by the works of the law. For they stumbled at that stumbling stone. As it is written: ‘Behold I lay in Zion a stumbling stone and rock of offense, and whoever believes on Him will not be put to shame.’”

9:6 -9:11: This section provides contrast between temporal; national Israel with the true, eternal “Israel” of God. Clear (and literal ) distinction is made between the children of promise from God who issued forth from Abraham, Sarah, and later, Isaac. Who compare to the offspring of Ishmael, who came from Hagar (representing human effort and works to achieve God’s plan). This is not an allegorical passage.

These “children of the promise were actual people, who were counted as the “seed” being the spiritual “Israel” of God. These describe and typify the later remnant saved by the grace of God, out of the nation of Israel: “Even so then, at this present time there is a remnant according to the election of grace.” Romans 11:6 This portion of Romans 9 is further explained in Romans 11:1-7.

9:12 & 13: Reveals God’s love for this spiritual remnant who are known and chosen
by God in Christ (represented by Jacob); compared to hatred for those born of mere flesh, outside of Christ (typified by Esau).

9:14: The human objection to this truth, anticipated by Paul.

9:15-21: Answers to the objections and explanations given according to the sovereign will and good pleasure of God.

9:22-26: Comparisons between two kinds of “vessels” created by God for His use and purposes . . .(natural, ungodly, unsaved, non-elect men) versus (elect, spiritual, men chosen and predestinated to be saved in Christ) . . .the elect prepared to receive mercy and glory with God.

(Note: the former (old) antithesis between Jew versus Gentile which had existed for centuries between the nation born of Isaac, and those born of Ishmael (due to births from
two different mothers who symbolically represented two different covenants) is now
replaced with this revelation and comparison of two kinds of men that issued from the same parents, Jacob and Rebeccah. These two were twins in Rebeccah’s womb. One was loved and the other was hated, according strictly to the sovereign will and purposes of God.

New distinction is made between men loved according to Godly election, and reprobates who prove to always be unfaithful, unbelieving, wicked men. These manifest in all nationalities; thus we see multitudes of men are saved by the grace of God out of every nationality (Rev. 5:9, 7:9) , while multitudes of reprobates continue to exist amongst all the nations at large. If opportunity presents, I have much more Scripture that reveals only two kinds (seeds) of men issued from Adam. The ungodly or Godly. Saved or unsaved. Elect or reprobate. Righteous or damned. Loved in Christ, or unknown outside of Christ.

The two distinguished from each other, according to the will of God that determined which kind of human “vessel” would receive deserved wrath, and which human “vessels” would receive undeserved grace, according to His decree of Unconditional Election.

9:27 – 29: This remnant of spiritual seed that will be called out of national Israel according to election, reveal the salvation that comes by the grace of God. The true, spiritual “Israel” is elect in the “Israel of God”, Jesus Christ, who manifest saving faith. If this remnant had not been saved, according to election and the grace of God, the entire nation of Israel would have been destroyed like “Sodom . . .we would have been made like Gomorrah.”


May God bless our attempts to study together . . .

Nang



* Elwell Evangelical Dictionary

[bridgeforsale]

9:27 – 29: This remnant of spiritual seed that will be called out of national Israel according to election, reveal the salvation that comes by the grace of God. The true, spiritual “Israel” is elect in the “Israel of God”, Jesus Christ, who manifest saving faith. If this remnant had not been saved, according to election and the grace of God, the entire nation of Israel would have been destroyed like “Sodom . . .we would have been made like Gomorrah.”

This is a good area to begin. There is ample support for both my view and Nang’s. Before God destroyed Sodom He made sure Lot and his family were removed from that wicked city. To deal with this question properly I think a rendering of verses 22 – 29 should be examined.

[I]22 What if God, wanting to show His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, 23 and that He might make known the riches of His glory on the vessels of mercy, which He had prepared beforehand for glory, 24 even us whom He called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?

25 As He says also in Hosea:


“ I will call them My people, who were not My people,
And her beloved, who was not beloved.”[h]
26 “ And it shall come to pass in the place where it was said to them,

‘ You are not My people,’
There they shall be called sons of the living God.”

7 Isaiah also cries out concerning Israel:[j]


“ Though the number of the children of Israel be as the sand of the sea,
The remnant will be saved.
28 For He will finish the work and cut it short in righteousness,
Because the LORD will make a short work upon the earth.”

29 And as Isaiah said before:


“ Unless the LORD of Sabaoth[l]had left us a seed,
We would have become like Sodom,
And we would have been made like Gomorrah.”

Moreover, some Biblical versions (notably the NIV) replace the word “seed” with “descendants.” Moreover, directly before verse 29 Paul mentions the remnant. However, this entire chapter was designed by Paul to show his audience of Jewish converts that all Jewish people were not meant to be saved by God (at least for the moment).

He is showing them:

1. God always intended to graft in the Gentiles

2. Only a limited number of Jews would be the firstfruits of Christ and grafted into the new covenant of faith; and this was by divine design; and

3. The reason why God had longsuffering for Jewish disobedience was because they were the people He chose to bring forth the seed of Christ.

We find Paul using this terminology in other parts of Scripture:

Now the promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed He does not say, "And to seeds," as referring to many, but rather to one, "And to your seed," that is, Christ (Galatians 3:16).

"It is you who are the sons of the prophets and of the covenant which God made with your fathers, saying to Abraham, 'AND IN YOUR SEED ALL THE FAMILIES OF THE EARTH SHALL BE BLESSED’ (Acts 3:25).

This is an important distinction because it does get to the heart of the meaning of this chapter. The body of Christ is elected; and union with the body of Christ is conditioned on faith.

Leaving aside the larger question of whether grace is irresistible or not; the allegories used in chapter refers to the old and new covenants. Paul’s focus is to explain to his audience of Jewish converts why all Jews were not meant to be saved (in the interim until the fullness of the gentiles are grafted in). They felt if all Jews weren’t saved the word of God must fail. Paul illustrates, from their own scriptures, that these presumptions are incorrect. The chapter is not an exposition on election. It does show that those grafted into the covenant of faith are the elect; however, it was not designed by Paul to reveal the mechanics of election.

Nang you referred to Genesis 17:17

And I will establish my covenant between me and thee and thy seed after thee in their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be a God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee.

You stated the following:

God decreed before He created the world, to elect a people in Christ, who would be made “accepted in the Beloved,” (Eph. 1:3-6). From this first decree issued forth the unilateral and everlasting Covenant of Grace established by Father, Son, and Holy Spirit; purposed to save an elect humanity (Genesis 17:7, 19), who were also decreed before time to be created in time, and thereby ordained to be fellow-heirs with Christ in the inheritance of the Kingdom of God. (Eph. 1:7-14)

Indeed God decreed before the founding of the world to elect a people in Christ.

In Galatians 3:16 Paul reveals the meaning of the Old Testament usage of the word “seed.” In Acts 3:25 Luke makes a similar reference, referring to Genesis 22:18

In your seed all the nations of the earth shall be blessed, because you have obeyed My voice."

Similarly:

And thy seed shall be as the dust of the earth, and thou shalt spread abroad to the west, and to the east, and to the north, and to the south: and in thee and in thy seed shall all the families of the earth be blessed (Genesis 28:14).

This promise is reiterated to Isaac and then Jacob throughout Genesis. Paul explains that these references to their “seed” meant Christ.

Let me clarify my position regarding the foreordination of Christ. I do not dispute this. Christ was ordained before the founding of the world to be the Messiah (just so we don’t spend time challenging a point we both agree on).

Just to touch on some ancillary points, since you focused on this point and put a good deal of effort into it. I do not dispute election; I simply object to double predestination.

There are certainly many verses that mention election; and few that discuss the mechanics of election. You cited Romans 8:29 a verse that could just as easily be used to prove my position as yours. Those whom God foreknew He predestined. My position is simply that God’s elective decree is the result of His foreknowledge of the identity of those who would willingly enter into union with the body of Christ. Those who will not resist the divine energy Arminians refer to as prevenient grace; seeking Christ as a result.

First, the mechanics of election is best described by the following verse:

Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ: Grace unto you, and peace, be multiplied (1 Peter 1:2).

There can no clearer indication of how God arrived at His elective choice. He did so “according to His foreknowledge.”

Regarding prevenient grace:

And I, if I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all men to Myself" (John 12:32).

Okay, back to the subject at hand.

9:14: The human objection to this truth, anticipated by Paul.

9:15-21: Answers to the objections and explanations given according to the sovereign will and good pleasure of God.

9:22-26: Comparisons between two kinds of “vessels” created by God for His use and purposes . . .(natural, ungodly, unsaved, non-elect men) versus (elect, spiritual, men chosen and predestinated to be saved in Christ) . . .the elect prepared to receive mercy and glory with God.

(Note: the former (old) antithesis between Jew versus Gentile which had existed for centuries between the nation born of Isaac, and those born of Ishmael (due to births from
two different mothers who symbolically represented two different covenants) is now
replaced with this revelation and comparison of two kinds of men that issued from the same parents, Jacob and Rebeccah. These two were twins in Rebeccah’s womb. One was loved and the other was hated, according strictly to the sovereign will and purposes of God.

6But it is not as though (Q)the word of God has failed (R)For they are not all Israel who are descended from Israel;

7nor are they all children (S)because they are Abraham's descendants, but: "(T)THROUGH ISAAC YOUR DESCENDANTS WILL BE NAMED."

8That is, it is not the children of the flesh who are (U)children of God, but the (V)children of the promise are regarded as descendants.

9For this is the word of promise: "(W)AT THIS TIME I WILL COME, AND SARAH SHALL HAVE A SON."

10(X)And not only this, but there was (Y)Rebekah also, when she had conceived twins by one man, our father Isaac;

11for though the twins were not yet born and had not done anything good or bad, so that (Z)God's purpose according to His choice would stand, not because of works but because of Him who calls,

12it was said to her, "(AA)THE OLDER WILL SERVE THE YOUNGER."

You opine that this chapter is discussing the “human objection to the truth” however, it couldn’t be more clear that this letter was to an audience of Jewish converts who felt the word of God must fail if all Jews weren’t saved. This is made apparent by verse 6, it’s not as though the word of God has failed. Then Paul explains the identity of the true Israel. Why would Paul go through such lengths to explain why all Jews weren’t meant to be saved to an audience of gentiles? The first Christians in Rome were predominantly Jewish converts, although there were some Gentiles. Paul went through great lengths in his ministry to explain to his Jewish detractors that the Gentiles were also meant to be included in the covenant of faith. Paul even begins this chapter by a lengthy exhortation to his ethnic kinsmen, the Jewish people. Thus, the purpose of this letter, as I’ve explained it, couldn’t be clearer.

As I explained earlier, God had longsuffering for the Jews because they were chosen to carry forth the seed of Christ. The historical roots of this revelation can be traced back to God’s earliest revelations to man in Genesis. This is how the “older shall serve the younger.” Another allegorical usage Paul employs is explaining that one child of Abraham was born to a bondservant and the other to a free woman.

This is another indication of the meaning of the passage the older shall serve the younger. The purpose of the older (children of the flesh) was to make the riches of God’s glory known to the younger (the children of the promise). As Paul explains in his opening exhortation to his ethnic kinsmen:

my kinsmen according to the flesh, who are Israelites, to whom belongs the adoption as sons, and the glory and the covenants and the giving of the Law and the temple service and the promises,

5whose are the fathers, and from whom is the Christ according to the flesh, who is over all, God blessed forever. Amen.

This is how the children of the flesh (the older) serves the children of the promise (the younger). They carried forth the word of God and they carried forward the seed of Christ. Another distinction here is that Christ Himself embodied both the children of the promise and the children of the flesh. While Paul carries forward his allegorical usage (of his reference to Isaac and Ishmael) to his usage of Jacob and Esau, the fact that Jacob and Esau were born from the same mother has additional importance. The allegorical usage of the same lump of clay as representing Rebekah is given an additional meaning. Paul is explaining that God ensured Jacob and Esau were born as twins to symbolize Christ (Christ Himself represented both flesh and spiritual Israel, as Paul notes in his opening exhortations to his ethnic kinsmen). From the same womb (Mary) two nations were represented. The older nation served the younger by dying. This death (or destruction) of the older nation, as Paul explains to the reader, has always been decreed by God. It was foretold beginning in Genesis; and Paul’s goal in this chapter is to explain this to his audience of Jewish converts.


Christ’s flesh served the children of the promise by His sacrifice on the cross.


Christ’s flesh embodied the perfect Jew. His flesh was perfect in its righteousness in terms of adherence to old covenant law. He was more righteous that the Pharisee’s, His flesh was perfect. It was this idea that He put to death by His work on the cross. The idea that our flesh can attain salvation for our soul is gone forever.

The allegorical usage of Jacob and Esau in reference to Christ is only used only to show the meaning of the twins being birthed from one mother and how God chose the old covenant law of the flesh for destruction and the new covenant children of the promise for glorification. Both Jacob and Esau were born innocent, as Christ was, but God made His choice notwithstanding their innocence just as He decreed to destroy the old covenant of the flesh by Christ’s death on the cross and birth a new covenant through His resurrection.

God always hated the faithless legalistic Pharisaic class (just as He hated Esau). Their offerings and sacrifices amounted to filthy rags in His eyes. Christ came down for two reasons. To destroy the old and usher in the new, this was the significance of His death and resurrection. With the death of Christ sin died because so did the legalistic and ritualistic old covenant law.

When Christ said even thinking adultery is adultery He wasn’t creating a new commandment. Rather He was illustrating the impossibility of avoiding sin. We’re all sinners. The Pharisees didn’t believe this, which is why Christ called them to the carpet on their own hypocrisy. They thought themselves above sin; Christ came to teach otherwise.

Now righteousness is imputed by faith.

This is not to say we have license to go on sinning. In fact when we sin we indebt ourselves to the world, which impedes our ability to serve God. However, that’s the only utility for avoiding sin. The law is for our benefit not for God’s. This is what the children of the flesh failed to understand. They thought they could earn salvation and please God through law based works. God only expects faith and love; that’s it. A witness to faith is love because the Holy Spirit is love (See Romans 15:30).

God Bless,
AW

[Nang]

FIRST ROUND REBUTTAL


As AW has opined in his first-round argument, I too believe the overall emphasis of Romans Chapter 9 centers in verse 27. AW claims the emphasis is placed upon the necessity of faith, but I believe the emphasis is placed on the remnant being saved by grace according to eternal and Godly decree. Paul reveals the foundation and grounds for his teachings of election, not only in this chapter we discuss, but continuing through Romans Chapter 11.

Paul refers back to Isaiah 10:22 when he quotes,

“For though thy people Israel be as the sand of the sea, yet a remnant of them shall be saved.”

The expression “sand of the sea,” was used in various biblical accounts to denote a great multitude that cannot be easily numbered or measured:

“As the host of heaven cannot be numbered, neither the sand of the sea measured: so will I multiply the seed of David my servant, and the Levites that minister unto me.” Jeremiah 33:22 (c.p. Genesis 41:49, Judges 7:12, I Kings 4:29, Job 6:3, Psalm 78:27)

God promised Abraham that his descendents would consist of such a multitude:

“That in blessing I will bless thee, and in multiplying I will multiply thy seed as the stars of the heaven, and as the sand which is upon the sea shore; and thy seed shall possess the gate of his enemies. Genesis 22:17

Jacob claimed this promise in a petition to God to protect him against Esau:

“And thou saidst, I will surely do thee good, and make thy seed as the sand of the sea, which cannot be numbered for multitude.” Genesis 32:12

Accordingly, we can understand these promises to pertain to the nation of Israel, who were indeed the biological seed of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. However; because this covenant made between God and Abraham was given only through this specific family lineage, we learn there is a spiritual and saving aspect to the same covenant.

The prophet Hosea reveals this truth when He speaks of future Gentiles being included spiritually amongst the number of “the children of Israel”:

“Yet the number of the children of Israel shall be as the sand of the
sea, which cannot be measured nor numbered; and it shall come to pass, that in the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not my people, there it shall be said unto them, Ye are the sons of the living God.” Hosea 1:10

In the N.T. we read the same expression being used to denote Abraham producing faithful descendents, which make up a “spiritual Israel,” who believed the covenant promises of God by faith; these are also referred to as a “remnant” saved out of “national Israel”:

“Therefore sprang there even of one, and him as good as dead, so many as the stars of the sky in multitude, and as the sand which is by the sea shore innumerable. These all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off, and were persuaded of them, and embraced them, and confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth.” Hebrews 11:12&13

Without a doubt there are references to two different Israels when it comes to covenant promises from God, for God made two kinds of promise to Abraham. The earthly descendants of Abraham were promised a geographical mass of land, and the particular elect lineage of Abraham, that were blessed with salvation through Isaac and Jacob, were promised the inheritance of a heavenly kingdom that would be brought by the “Seed” of Abraham; The Savior. This small, remnant of “spiritual seed” from amongst all of national Israel, were enabled to believe the spiritual promises included in the covenant, as the Holy Spirit testified:

“ . . Now they desire a better country, that is, an heavenly: wherefore God is not ashamed to be called their God: for he hath prepared for them a city. . . a city which hath foundations, whose builder and maker is God.” Hebrews 11:16, 10

Thus, I agree with AW, that on this Scriptural basis, “all Jewish people were not meant to be saved by God.” AW adds the caveat: “at least for the moment,” but I would say that not all national Israel are spiritually elect of God; therefore “all” earthly Israel were never ordained to be saved by the grace of God.

I do not agree with AW that the “Israelites” spoken of in the first five verses of Romans 9 are “Jewish brethren” in the church at Rome, but rather, Paul refers generally to all of national Israel, who are brethren only “according to flesh.”

This is why we see Paul in such anguish over his fellow Jews. Paul sees their unfaithfulness and unbelief in the covenant promises of God. Paul is aware that God has cast off the Jewish nation as a whole, in order to bring salvation to the Gentiles. Paul would not suffer this anguish over the reprobation of the nation at large, if they were indeed saved by grace and sitting in the congregation of believers in Rome. (Regardless of their poor understanding of “New Covenant” doctrines.)

No, Paul laments over the lost condition and Godly reprobation of the earthly, unsaved “Israelites.”

Without a doubt, Paul makes clear distinction between unfaithful, national Israel, and the faithful and true, spiritual Israel of God, who were elected by God to be saved in the Elect One, the “Israel of God” Jesus Christ:

“ . . .For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel; neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, neither because they are they all children; but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called.” Romans 9:6&7

Out of all the Israelites that were born from the biological seed of Abraham, only those descendents of Isaac and Jacob were given faith from God to believe and comprehend the Kingdom and promises of a “heavenly city”. (John 3:3) Throughout the history of the nation of Israel, only a remnant from this lineage received grace and the Spirit to grasp and believe the spiritual covenant promises of a Savior who would provide them an inheritance of everlasting life. Only a remnant, chosen and elect by God, would be saved by grace, through faith, out of all the nation of Israel. These alone are truly the “Israel of God” and all of these WILL be saved:

“And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob.” Romans 11:26

This is the revelation of the “Deliverer,” Jesus Christ, who would save Jacob, according to covenant promise made to Abraham and Isaac. This is the sense in which “Jacob is loved.” This promise is not extended to the rest of Abraham’s biological seed, and it is in this sense that “Esau,” the twin brother is said to be hated by God.

Now AW makes out this portion of Scripture (Romans 9:7-13) to be mere allegory, which notion I strongly disagree. The account of Rebeccah conceiving twins and giving birth to Jacob and Esau is propositional truth and historical fact. As were the scriptural accounts of the two sons that issued from Abraham; Isaac and Ishmael. Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob are repeatedly singled out in Scripture to teach the divine election of individual souls.

In fact, it was the naming of specific souls in Christ, before the foundation of the world, that Scripture reveals as the first and foremost decree of God. (Eph. 1:3&4)

From this irrevocable decree comes the Everlasting Covenant of Grace; therefore, this unilateral Covenant was established between Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Man is not a party to this Covenant, and only a remnant of man is named as beneficiaries of this Covenant. This Covenant is established on the same basis as a “Last Will and Testament” written on the behalf of heirs to an estate, which does not become effective until the Testator of the Estate suffers death. (See Hebrews 9:15-17)

This Covenant is founded legally and solely according to the will and purposes of God, and not upon the actions or decisions of sinful beneficiaries, at all. It was performed in history and time by the Triune God; unconditional and independent of any choices or actions of men.

Paul clearly teaches this, when he says:

“For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth.” Romans 9:11

What we have here, is the literal teaching, of literal people, in actual time, who really were born and born again by the Spirit of God, and given faith to believe in the covenant promises of God, according to grace. These people are a testimony to the Gospel. This is not a make-believe story. There is no basis to reduce these words to mere allegory, so they must be studied literally. The account of God choosing Isaac instead of Ishmael, or choosing Jacob instead of Esau as the legal heirs and beneficiaries of eternal covenant blessings cannot be challenged as less than valid testament. God chose these individual persons by name as adopted sons, to inherit His name, wealth, and Kingdom.

AW also makes references to a “covenant of faith,” which, as far as I know, is not taught in Holy Scripture. There is no such language.

Yes, the chosen remnant, who are saved according to Godly covenant, proved to be men of faith. Without a doubt. But it is because of the eternal Covenant of Grace, that these received faith from God to believe the promises and thus be imputed with righteousness. Unfortunately, AW is attempting to set “faith” up to be a condition of covenant, but the Covenant of Grace is unconditional.

IOW’s Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob were never required (or able) to produce faith in order to be chosen by God to receive the promises. Covenant promises are extended only by the will and good purposes of God. Faith and repentance are gifts of grace, freely provided for those decreed to receive the covenant blessings.

I am pleased to note AW goes along with my scriptural view that God elected specific people in Christ, before the foundation of the world. AW goes along with my scriptural view that promise of this election came to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. AW goes along with my scriptural view that the “seed” promised to Abraham, ultimately pointed to Christ. So I contend AW must consider all these scriptural truths to be the definition and revelation of “predestination,” and I agree with AW if he does so state.

However, AW denies what is termed “double predestination.” The basis of this denial, is that AW thinks that God predestined Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob according to His foreknowledge of their actions. On the supposed grounds that God knew what these men would do or not do, and what they would believe or not believe, they were named as elect of God.

But this directly contradicts Romans 9:11, where Paul reveals that God chose which twin would receive salvation, according to election, before they were even conceived, let alone before they were born and matured enough to perform good or evil. God’s foreknowledge of what Jacob would do in his lifetime, did not determine Jacob’s election. God loved Jacob before Jacob was born. God knew Jacob, in Christ, before He created. God determined Jacob would inherit everlasting life through the works of the Savior, before God gave Jacob the faith to believe the promise of the Savior. God predestined the fate of Jacob, before He created Jacob. This is predestination.

Every Godly truth has two purposes; the sword of God (the Holy Scriptures) is a two-edged sword in the hands of God the Holy Spirit. So if God predestined the fate of those He chose to save in Christ, God also thereby sealed the fate of those He chose not to save. The word “predestination” is used only in regard to Godly men; the word “reprobation” is the word to teach the other side of this same truth. “Double Predestination” is simply a handy theological term meant to convey the truth that God has determined the fate of all men. God has decreed who will be entitled to partake of the Tree of Life in the heavenly city and God has decreed who will be left outside the gates. (Rev. 22:14&15)

All men, due to the original sin of Adam, deserve hell, but God in His grace “predestined” many men to be spared unto eternal life, through the vicarious death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. God in His justice has left the remainder of humanity in their sins; consigned to the second death and everlasting hellfire. Reprobation cannot be denied. To deny the doctrine of Reprobation is equivalent to teaching “Universalism.”

There is no middle doctrine according to Holy Scripture. One either believes in sovereign election and predestination, or one is reduced to having to advocate some version of “Universalism.”

(I will not enter discussion re: prevenient grace at this point, because AW only presented mention of the concept, an erroneous proof text, but issued no argument.)

AW’s attempt to compare the Old and New Covenant to the persons of Jacob and Esau, is truly allegory, but it comes from his imagination, and not from the Holy Scriptures. The Scripture he used to make this attempt (Romans 9:4&5) has been stretched and abused.

The comparison made in these verses is one between national Israel, and the spiritual Israel of God. I agree that the purpose of the old covenant of law was to draw men to the Christ, but it is obvious that purpose was not applied to all of national Israel; for only a chosen remnant under the law were brought into faith in Christ, by the grace of God (“New Covenant”). I truly do not see “Old” and “New” depicted by “older twin” and “younger twin.” I do not believe such a concept will withstand the scrutiny of Scripture.

For instance, AW makes this remark: “Another distinction here is that Christ Himself embodied both the children of promise and the children of the flesh.” This is an untenable statement, for it would teach Universalism. Not all men were chosen to be represented in the Person of Jesus Christ. Only those chosen in Him, before the foundation of the world, were represented in Christ’s life and death. The totally corrupted “children of the flesh” were never in Christ, never represented by Christ, and are prepared for destruction, as vessels of dishonor, being OUTSIDE of Christ.

Which brings us to the two vessels, made out of one lump. (Romans 9:21-23)

AW interprets the “one lump” to be Rebeccah, who produced two boys; one beloved by God (chosen in Christ) and the other hated by God (outside of Christ). Jacob the elect, and Esau the non-elect. Jacob predestined to salvation and everlasting life, and Esau judged reprobate and prepared for destruction. AW attempts to establish his theory that Christ represented both, by the fact they were conceived in one womb. But this theory will not stand, for the same Scritural distinction is made between Isaac and Ishmael (Galatians 4:21-31), who came from the wombs of two different mothers. They were never from “one lump” It is a deficient analogy, which is certainly not strong enough upon which to form doctrine.

Rather, the “potter” should be likened to Creator God, who had the power and right to fashion His material world into whatever He pleased. Again, God willfully and purposefully created “vessels of dishonor” (reprobate sinners) as well as “vessels of mercy” (saints predestined by love and grace); the former made to be destroyed (II Peter 2:12, Jude verse 10); the latter made to inherit the Kingdom of God as fellow-heirs with Jesus Christ (Romans 8:17, Galatians 3:29, Titus 3:7, James 2:5).

This portion of Scripture teaches the ultimate sovereignty of God, who is the determiner of all things in His universe. (Psalm 115:3)

AW claims Christ’s flesh embodied the perfect Jew. I beg to disagree. Christ’s flesh embodied the Son of God, come in the form of His brethren, yet without sin. These elect, individual, particular brethren alone were represented in Christ during his incarnation and death. (Hebrews 2:14-18) Jesus Christ came as federal head of all the elect chosen by the Father before the foundation of the world. These alone are written in the Lamb’s Book of Life.

AW claims “righteousness is imputed by faith.” That is almost right, but AW adds faith as an inaccurate condition and requirement for salvation. The righteousness of Jesus Christ is imputed to those He justified by His blood on the cross, according to legal ruling of God. Faith is the guaranteed fruit and result of imputed righteousness; not the requirement. (I suspect this subject will prove to be the true core of our dispute.)

AW claims “God only expects faith and love.” As if faith and love conjured up out of unchanged, unbelieving hearts can produce faith and love to please God!!!

No, “we love God because He first loved us.” I John 4:19 Christians exhibit faith pleasing to God, only because He, in His loving grace, changed our old hearts to new believing hearts, through the power of His Holy Spirit in regeneration. God has recreated the old man, a new creature in Christ. (Eph. 2:10)

God is as much the Creator of the spiritual man as He was Creator of the first man made of dust. (I Cor. 15:45-49)

Respectfully submitted,
Nang

[bridgeforsale]

As AW has opined in his first-round argument, I too believe the overall emphasis of Romans Chapter 9 centers in verse 27. AW claims the emphasis is placed upon the necessity of faith, but I believe the emphasis is placed on the remnant being saved by grace according to eternal and Godly decree. Paul reveals the foundation and grounds for his teachings of election, not only in this chapter we discuss, but continuing through Romans Chapter 11.

Hello Nang and thank you for your thoughtful presentation of your position. While the central message of Paul's letter to the Roman's is faith based salvation I posit that the focus of Romans 9 is to show his audience of Jewish converts in Rome, from their own scriptures, why many of their brethren will reject Christ and thus not be saved. Paul seeks to dispel the notion that the word of God must fail if all Jews aren’t saved. Additionally, Paul is explaining that the Old Testament foretold the grafting in of the gentiles.

Paul, just after his opening exhortations to his ethnic kinsmen, states:

It is not as though God's word had failed. For not all who are descended from Israel are Israel. 7Nor because they are his descendants are they all Abraham's children.

This is where Paul opens his argument. Indeed Paul reminds his audience that God only intended to save a remnant from ethnic Israel (blood descendants of Abraham). However, Paul does not remind his audience of this fact because he sought to reveal double predestination or anything of the sort. Rather, Paul shows them, from their own Scriptures, that their assumption, which is if all the Jewish people aren't saved the word of God must fail, is incorrect. Moreover, it is important the remnant is properly defined. The remnant, though they were blood descendants of Abraham, are also identified as children of the promise. Paul is not making a distinction here. The 7,000 who did not bow to Baal were saved by faith as Abraham was and as were the early Jewish converts to Christianity. These were all grafted into spiritual Israel through Christ’s reconciliation as explained in Ephesians 2.

The purpose God had for the Jewish people was that they would bring forth the "seed" of Christ. This was the purpose of "ethnic" Israel. Indeed Paul is showing that not all who descended from Abraham are the true Israel; the true Israel are the children of the promise (those who have faith in Christ). However, Paul completes his message in Romans 11, by giving comfort to his kinsmen that eventually God will keep His promise to ethnic Israel and save them.

However, their salvation will be on God's terms, not their own. God will remove all Godlessness from Jacob, and this is God's covenant with them when He takes away their sins (See Romans 11:25-27). Indeed we know there is only one path to atonement, which is of course Christ. Therefore, Paul reveals that God will keep His promise to ethnic Israel by turning them to Christ (whether this will occur at the second coming of Christ or sometime before is unclear).

[quote=Nang}Accordingly, we can understand these promises to pertain to the nation of Israel, who were indeed the biological seed of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. However; because this covenant made between God and Abraham was given only through this specific family lineage, we learn there is a spiritual and saving aspect to the same covenant.[/quote]

Indeed. However, this isn't painting a complete picture. Paul rounds out his message by revealing that all of ethnic Israel will ultimately be saved; however, they will saved when they are regrafted in to the olive tree (through faith in Christ and membership into His body -- in other words they will join the family of the children of the promise).

Moreover, Christ work on the cross reconciled the flesh with the promise.

God's plan was to use ethnic Israel as a vehicle to spread His message of faith based salvation to the world. Consider this verse:

For if their rejection is the reconciliation of the world, what will their acceptance be but life from the dead? (Romans 11:15).

Paul does not have double predestination in view here, rather he is illustrating the mechanics of God's plan (which Christ Himself revealed to him).

In the N.T. we read the same expression being used to denote Abraham producing faithful descendents, which make up a “spiritual Israel,” who believed the covenant promises of God by faith; these are also referred to as a “remnant” saved out of “national Israel”:

Without a doubt there are references to two different Israels when it comes to covenant promises from God, for God made two kinds of promise to Abraham. The earthly descendants of Abraham were promised a geographical mass of land, and the particular elect lineage of Abraham, that were blessed with salvation through Isaac and Jacob, were promised the inheritance of a heavenly kingdom that would be brought by the “Seed” of Abraham; The Savior. This small, remnant of “spiritual seed” from amongst all of national Israel, were enabled to believe the spiritual promises included in the covenant, as the Holy Spirit testified:

“ . . Now they desire a better country, that is, an heavenly: wherefore God is not ashamed to be called their God: for he hath prepared for them a city. . . a city which hath foundations, whose builder and maker is God.” Hebrews 11:16, 10

Read Hebrew 11:16 carefully. God promises them a “heavenly” country. A city, which hath foundations, whose builder and maker, is God. This is clearly referring to spiritual Israel, not a geographic piece of land; and the foundation spoken of here is Christ.

Nang you drew a distinction between flesh and spiritual Israel, which IMO fails to consider the fact that Christ reconciled the two through His sacrifice; as I will explain below in greater detail.

It wasn’t that God decided to only save a particular set of people from among the Jewish people. God ordered events so many Jews would not accept Christ; however, only because this was necessary to spread the word of Christ to the world.

It was necessary that some Jews hated Christ because He had to be crucified in order for the reconciliation to take place, and the law destroyed.

However, implicit in the reconciliation is that Jews have the opportunity to be saved. They were hardened so that the prophecy would come to fruition. The fact that many Jews still do not believe is simply a consequence of the hardening that was necessary to ensure the crucifixion of Christ. Jesus foretold that this hardening would have long-term consequences when He reveals that many of the first will be last and the last first. Many (but not all) of the Jews who were the “first” to be chosen by God will be saved last; as a result of the hardening, which was necessary to ensure the prophecy was fulfilled.

Thus, I agree with AW, that on this Scriptural basis, “all Jewish people were not meant to be saved by God.” AW adds the caveat: “at least for the moment,” but I would say that not all national Israel are spiritually elect of God; therefore “all” earthly Israel were never ordained to be saved by the grace of God.

You’re ignoring the clear revelation Paul makes in Romans 11:25-32.

I do not agree with AW that the “Israelites” spoken of in the first five verses of Romans 9 are “Jewish brethren” in the church at Rome, but rather, Paul refers generally to all of national Israel, who are brethren only “according to flesh.”

Okay, this is not a relevant distinction. I’m glad you agree that Paul is addressing his Jewish kinsmen (of course the letter is to the “Romans”).

This is why we see Paul in such anguish over his fellow Jews. Paul sees their unfaithfulness and unbelief in the covenant promises of God. Paul is aware that God has cast off the Jewish nation as a whole, in order to bring salvation to the Gentiles. Paul would not suffer this anguish over the reprobation of the nation at large, if they were indeed saved by grace and sitting in the congregation of believers in Rome. (Regardless of their poor understanding of “New Covenant” doctrines.)

No, Paul laments over the lost condition and Godly reprobation of the earthly, unsaved “Israelites.”

Your assumption here is that Paul has cast off the Jewish nation (of the flesh) as a whole.

14For he himself is our peace, who has made the two one and has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility, 15by abolishing in his flesh the law with its commandments and regulations. His purpose was to create in himself one new man out of the two, thus making peace, 16and in this one body to reconcile both of them to God through the cross, by which he put to death their hostility. 17He came and preached peace to you who were far away and peace to those who were near. 18For through him we both have access to the Father by one Spirit. (Ephesians 2).

As we see here Christ made one man out of two. Reconciling the two to God. These two men are represented here in Romans 9 as Jacob and Esau.

First there were two men born from different mothers to symbolize the children of the flesh and promise; one born from a bondservant the other from a free woman to symbolize the older serving the younger. Then two men were born twins from one mother, symbolizing the children of the flesh and promise. Then the flesh and the promise were reconciled by one man by representing both spiritual Israel (Christ was the fulfillment of the promise) and flesh Israel. What can say it better than this:

14For he himself is our peace, who has made the two one and has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility, 15by abolishing in his flesh the law with its commandments and regulations. His purpose was to create in himself one new man out of the two, thus making peace, 16and in this one body to reconcile both of them to God through the cross, by which he put to death their hostility (Ephesians 2:14-15).

Two men into one, abolishing in His flesh the law. The older (the law represented by the flesh) serves the younger (the promise) by abolishing (Paul uses the word destruction and the makes allegorical usage of the term vessels) forever legalism and law-based righteousness.

Without a doubt, Paul makes clear distinction between unfaithful, national Israel, and the faithful and true, spiritual Israel of God, who were elected by God to be saved in the Elect One, the “Israel of God” Jesus Christ:

“ . . .For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel; neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, neither because they are they all children; but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called.” Romans 9:6&7

Now you’re basically stating (I think) that these references (Isaac/Ishmael – Jacob/Esau) are made to denote particular election rather than representing two covenants. However, consider this verse:

21Tell me, you who want to be under the law, are you not aware of what the law says? 22For it is written that Abraham had two sons, one by the slave woman and the other by the free woman. 23His son by the slave woman was born in the ordinary way; but his son by the free woman was born as the result of a promise.

24These things may be taken figuratively, for the women represent two covenants. (Galatians 4:21).

Paul tells us that these things may be taken figuratively and the women represent two covenants.

Out of all the Israelites that were born from the biological seed of Abraham, only those descendents of Isaac and Jacob were given faith from God to believe and comprehend the Kingdom and promises of a “heavenly city”. (John 3:3) Throughout the history of the nation of Israel, only a remnant from this lineage received grace and the Spirit to grasp and believe the spiritual covenant promises of a Savior who would provide them an inheritance of everlasting life. Only a remnant, chosen and elect by God, would be saved by grace, through faith, out of all the nation of Israel. These alone are truly the “Israel of God” and all of these WILL be saved:

So you’re saying that all the descendants of Isaac and Jacob came to Christ? This is untenable. Out of the Jews prior to the time of Christ God only retained 7,000. Moreover, the number of Jews who converted to Christ during the early Christian period was small. Paul is explaining the meaning of Old Testament passages, which were not apparent before Christ. God’s selections of Isaac and Jacob had a deeper meaning, which was to show that the older will serve the younger and to make a distinction between the children of the flesh and the children of the promise.

It was not meant to indicate only the blood descendants of Jacob will be saved. Rather it was through Jacobs’s bloodline that Christ was born. Christ reconciled the flesh and the promise, forever doing away with law based righteousness and election (or reprobation) based upon blood descendency. Election is now conditioned upon faith according to the foreknowledge of God; just as it’s written.

“And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob.” Romans 11:26

This is the revelation of the “Deliverer,” Jesus Christ, who would save Jacob, according to covenant promise made to Abraham and Isaac. This is the sense in which “Jacob is loved.” This promise is not extended to the rest of Abraham’s biological seed, and it is in this sense that “Esau,” the twin brother is said to be hated by God.

Again you’re neglecting the reconciliation of Christ and failing to realize that we’re Jacob. We are the children of the promise, or spiritual Israel. Esau represents law-based righteousness. This is the significance of the choice being made before the twins had done anything good or bad. It wasn’t Esau per se; rather it’s what Esau represents that God hated. This elective choice (to bring forth Christ from the lineage of Jacob) was not God choosing to save Jacob and not Esau. The extent of their significance was that both twins came from the same womb, as Paul allegorically refers to as the same lump of clay. Their birth order (which God decreed) is of additional importance. Esau was born first; the older shall serve the younger.

Now AW makes out this portion of Scripture (Romans 9:7-13) to be mere allegory, which notion I strongly disagree. The account of Rebeccah conceiving twins and giving birth to Jacob and Esau is propositional truth and historical fact. As were the scriptural accounts of the two sons that issued from Abraham; Isaac and Ishmael. Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob are repeatedly singled out in Scripture to teach the divine election of individual souls.

I reiterate, in Galatians 4 Paul clearly reveals the Old Testament stories of Isaac and Jacob are to be understood figuratively (as Paul so clearly states).

In Romans 9 Paul states:

9For this was how the promise was stated: "At the appointed time I will return, and Sarah will have a son."[c]

10Not only that, but Rebekah's children had one and the same father, our father Isaac.

The words AND NOT ONLY THAT connect the two stories (of Isaac & Ishmael / Jacob & Esau). Paul is showing the reader that God has an immutable plan for mankind, which He decreed to perform in a certain way. The Jews felt that if they weren’t all saved the word of God must fail. They also felt that these choices by God were random and arbitrary and therefore unjust. Paul is correcting these erroneous presumptions.

Paul is explaining that the Jewish people were chosen so that God’s name would be proclaimed in all the earth, just as God raised up the Pharaoh into a position of power over Egypt and hardened his heart for the very same purpose. Paul is using the example of the Pharaoh to illustrate this to his audience.

When Paul mentions the same lump of clay this is a reference to Rebekah, and the vessel for common use & for mercy are an allegorical reference to Jacob and Esau.

Paul is also showing that these choices do not necessarily concern salvation. As Paul explains:

20Now in a great house there are not only vessels of gold and silver but also of wood and clay, some for honorable use, some for dishonorable. 21Therefore, if anyone cleanses himself from what is dishonorable, he will be a vessel for honorable use, set apart as holy, useful to the master of the house, ready for every good work (2 Timothy 2:20-21).

This is why it isn’t unjust. God gives everyone a chance to cleanse him or herself from dishonor through faith in Christ.

Paul explains that Christ reconciled flesh and spiritual Israel by destroying the flesh. This flesh (represented by Esau) was the vessel prepared beforehand for destruction. Therefore, no longer is election based on blood lineage, now all (Jew, Gentile, Greek, man, woman, slave, and master) -- ALL have access to faith by grace.

I would like to briefly switch gears, because Nang you took the opportunity to make a general thesis statement regarding your views (outside the purview of Romans 9), which necessitates a response.

Reformed believers posit man has no free will, at least insofar as a cooperating role with grace. We can neither resist grace nor cooperate with it; in their opinion each person is either predestined for heaven or predestined for hell (double predestination).

However, how can this be so if Scripture reveals:

3This is good, and(C) it is pleasing in the sight of(D) God our Savior, 4who desires(E) all people to be saved and(F) to come to(G) the knowledge of the truth. (1 Timothy 2:3-4).

How can atonement be limited if Scripture reveals:

He is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but(B) also for the sins of the whole world (1 John 2:2).

The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world (John 1:29).

8Therefore, as one trespass[e] led to condemnation for all men, so one act of righteousness[f] leads to justification and life for(AF) all men (Romans 5:8).

How can we not have free will if Scripture teaches otherwise?

37"(A)Jerusalem, Jerusalem, who (B)kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to her! How often I wanted to gather your children together, (C)the way a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and you were unwilling (Matt 23:37).

21So they were willing to receive Him into the boat, and immediately the boat was at the land to which they were going (John 6:21).

This day I call heaven and earth as witnesses against you that I have set before you life and death, blessings and curses. Now choose life, so that you and your children may live (Deuteronomy 30:19).

You call faith a work as if the word work is the spawn of Satan:

Then said they unto him, "What shall we do, that we might work the works of God?" Jesus answered and said unto them, "This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent." - John 6:28,29

You say that election is not according to the foreknowledge of God:

1(A)Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who reside as (B)aliens, (C)scattered throughout (D)Pontus, (E)Galatia, (F)Cappadocia, (G)Asia, and (H)Bithynia, (I)who are chosen
2according to the (J)foreknowledge of God the Father, (K)by the sanctifying work of the Spirit, to (L)obey Jesus Christ and be (M)sprinkled with His blood: (N)May grace and peace be yours in the fullest measure (1 Peter 1:1-2).

What is Grace? How are we “called”?

And I, if I (A)am lifted up from the earth, will (B)draw all men to Myself." (John 12:32).
17For (A)the Law was given through Moses; (B)grace and (C)truth were realized through Jesus Christ (John 1:17).

There are a few verses that Reformed believers assert present strong proof of their position from John 6:

39"This is the will of Him who sent Me, that of (BD)all that He has given Me I (BE)lose nothing, but (BF)raise it up on the last day.

44"No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me (BO)draws him; and I will (BP)raise him up on the last day.

45"It is written (BQ)in the prophets, '(BR)AND THEY SHALL ALL BE (BS)TAUGHT OF GOD.' Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father, comes to Me.

46"(BT)Not that anyone has seen the Father, except the One who is from God; He has seen the Father.

47"Truly, truly, I say to you, he who believes (BU)has eternal life.

48"(BV)I am the bread of life.

49"(BW)Your fathers ate the manna in the wilderness, and they died.

50"This is the bread which (BX)comes down out of heaven, so that one may eat of it and (BY)not die.

51"(BZ)I am the living bread that (CA)came down out of heaven; if anyone eats of this bread, (CB)he will live forever; and the bread also which I will give (CC)for the life of the world is (CD)My flesh."

So how does God draw us? God draws us through Christ. Although Christ states He will draw all men to Himself, here He credits God for drawing men. The reason for this is explained by Christ, in John 6 in fact:

38"For (AZ)I have come down from heaven, (BA)not to do My own will, but (BB)the will of Him who (BC)sent Me (John 6:38).

Notice in verse 6:45 it states that they shall ALL be taught by God, and those who listen and learn from Him comes to Christ.

As it states in verse 51, Christ is the bread of life of the WORLD.

So when we properly dissect this chapter we find that it is consistent with the rest of Scripture and it reveals a cooperative role for man. God’s grace is Christ. Through His death He eradicated law-based righteousness, which was always impossible to adhere to. God bound all men to disobedience so He could have mercy on them all; through offering His Son to forgive our sins.

When Christ was resurrected His light shined in every heart. This is how He draws all to himself; and this is the grace or divine energy that precedes our choice. Christ credits God because as He acknowledges He came down not do His will but His Fathers.


When we make the error of thinking that we are elect because God arbitrarily chose us to the exclusion of others we have a logical cause to boast. It doesn’t even matter if you think other Christians are saved. It still gives cause to boast regarding our election as compared to non-believers.

Moreover, not believing that Christ came to forgive the sins of the world makes a liar out of God. That’s what His word states, and that is what we’re to believe.

Moreover, not believing that God wants to save all people and forgives all sins hinders perfect love (See 1 John 4). We are to love our enemy because God wants even them to be saved; because Jesus shines light even in their hearts.

The final charge, which is my view, is tantamount to universalism.

Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son (John 3:18).

Anyone who calls themselves an Arminian and does not believe this is not a real Arminian.


Why would we want to evangelize if all who will come to Christ will come regardless of what we do?

14How, then, can they call on the one they have not believed in? And how can they believe in the one of whom they have not heard? And how can they hear without someone preaching to them? 15And how can they preach unless they are sent? As it is written, "How beautiful are the feet of those who bring good news!" (Romans 10:14-15).


AW

[Nang]

ROUND TWO REBUTTAL

Greetings again, AW. With your indulgence, and for the sake of brevity, I will immediately, and without preamble, present my rebuttal to your most recent post.

You claim Paul’s central message of Romans 9 was meant to convey a faith-based salvation contrary to a “law-righteousness,” as you term living under the Law.

I counter by declaring that the entire Word of God teaches Godly salvation comes by grace through faith, and not by any works performed under the Law.

It is my contention that Romans 9 reveals the application of Godly grace to a particular, remnant of individuals, known by God; elect and called out from of the nation of Israel. (Romans 9:6-8, 11, 13, 15, 16, 18, 20, 23-27, 29.

It is also my contention that Paul’s teaching is indicative, and exemplary of God’s particular grace acting in this corrupt world at large; saving for Himself a remnant of humanity with which He will enjoy everlasting fellowship.

It is my argument that God never intended in the past, nor does God intend in the future, to save all national Israel. Not all the biological seed of Abraham will prove to be saints, making up the “spiritual Israel of God,” just as not all men born of Adam will see salvation by the grace of God. Only a remnant called out of the nation of Israel, as well as a remnant called out of all the other nations of the world, will be saved by the cross work of Jesus Christ. (Rev. 5:9, 7:9)

Moreover, it is important the remnant is properly defined. The remnant, though they were blood descendants of Abraham, are also identified as children of the promise.

This is correct. This is my side of the debate.

The 7,000 who did not bow to Baal were saved by faith as Abraham was and as were the early Jewish converts to Christianity.

The 7000 were saved by grace and exemplified the spiritual remnant, chosen by God for salvation. Again, you state my argument.

Out of the Jews prior to the time of Christ God only retained 7,000. Moreover, the number of Jews who converted to Christ during the early Christian period was small.

There were 7000 individuals who had not bowed the knee to Baal, at the time Elijah received this revelation (I Kings 19:18), but these were not the only souls saved during the entire O.T. period. You fail to mention all the faithful saints saved prior to Elijah’s lifetime; i.e. Abel, Seth, the Godly lineage that led to Noah, Noah’s sons, Job, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, Joshua, Caleb, Rahab, etc. etc.

(Are you disagreeing with the Scriptures I presented regarding the prophecies about the numbers saved, as being as “the sand of the sea?” If not, you might want to review that portion of my first rebuttal.)

Regardless, again you state my argument. Paul is teaching Godly election of a remnant of individuals (numbers, unknown), according to the Covenant promises of grace.

Paul is explaining the meaning of Old Testament passages, which were not apparent before Christ.

Paul is offering hope to Jews, that even though for 400 years, God had removed His presence from the nation at large, and had left them without a king or a prophet for all that time, that the King and Prophet of Israel, Jesus Christ had come in the flesh to save a remnant seed of believers still existing amongst them. (Romans 9:27-29, 11:6)

Indeed Paul is showing that not all who descended from Abraham are the true Israel; the true Israel are the children of the promise (those who have faith in Christ).

Agreed. Again you state my argument that Romans 9 is about Godly election of the “true and spiritual Israel of God.” All those saved; both Jew and Gentile; are named “children of promise.” (Romans 9:8)
(Are we debating?)

However, Paul completes his message in Romans 11, by giving comfort to his kinsmen that eventually God will keep His promise to ethnic Israel and save them.

All of them? Or only a remnant that will be called out of national Israel? Are you changing your mind?

Paul rounds out his message by revealing that all of ethnic Israel will ultimately be saved

So you now say all national Israel will be saved. According to what precedent?
When in history has God ever saved an entire nation? For that matter, when since the cross, has God ever saved an entire earthly church? Or to search further, when has God ever saved an entire family? Nations, churches, and families are always a mix of saved and unsaved members. All nations contain Godly and ungodly people. Churches consist of tares amongst the wheat. Family members are often at odd spiritually with each other.

So where is the Scripture or precedent that allows for the interpretation that God will save all of the earthly nation of Israel?

How do you account for Esau? And Ishmael? And Judas Iscariot, the Jewish "son of perdition?"

You really need to clarify your position in this debate.

Paul rounds out his message by revealing that all of ethnic Israel will ultimately be saved; however, they will saved when they are regrafted in to the olive tree (through faith in Christ and membership into His body -- in other words they will join the family of the children of the promise).

These were all grafted into spiritual Israel through Christ’s reconciliation as explained in Ephesians 2.

I fear there are many incorrect statements in your challenges; this being the only a couple of several unbiblical and mistaken claims. Seeing that you did not define your terms at the beginning of this debate, I feel duty-bound to use this rebuttal to correct several assertions you present using poor terminology or references.

For example:

Chapter Two of Ephesians teaches that all the elect of God were resurrected from being dead in trespasses, and raised together with Christ in His victory over death, to the salvation of everlasting life, solely by the grace of God. Ephesians Two does not teach about “all grafted into spiritual Israel through Christ’s reconciliation.” This language about “grafting” is not taught by Paul in Ephesians at all. (This language is only found in Romans Chapter 11; speaking of the “wild olive tree” that represents the external, temporal assemblies of God’s people, and not the spiritual, eternal, invisible “body of Christ.”)

The following is the actual language and focus of Ephesians Chapter Two:

14For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us;
15Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace;

This is not “grafting” national Israel into the “spiritual Israel.” This passage teaches God breaking down the cultural differences between Jews and Gentiles, in order to build one invisible, heavenly church body of Christ. God has reconciled the N.T. Gentiles with the remnant of saved O.T. Jewish saints, making them one in Christ. (See Ephesians 4:4-6.)

The later teaching of Paul in Romans 11 about the “wild olive tree” describes the sanctification of Israel as a nation. She was elected as the special people of God out of all the nations of the world. Israel was delivered from Egypt for this purpose, baptized in the cloud of the Holy Spirit who led her through the wilderness into the promised land as (partial, temporal) fulfillment of the covenant given to Abraham, and the nation was sanctified (set apart) to serve God and handle the Law and holy ordinances of God.

But none of the above worked salvation for all. Multitudes of Israelites still perished in their sins; unregenerate; unsaved; unfaithful and adulterous. Only a few souls were saved by the grace of God, and adopted into the spiritual, heavenly, kingdom as fellow-heirs of the promised Messiah. )Thus, the Bible reveals a sanctified, but unsaved, temporal, earthly, national Israel . . .as well as the true, saved, spiritual, “Israel” of God.

The “wild olive tree” represents only the earthly, national Israel. This nation was “holy” only so long as God Himself ruled as their King. But many, many branches of this temporal tree were cut off when God removed Himself from their midst, about 400 years prior to the incarnation of Christ. Since Christ’s incarnation, death, and resurrection, a remnant called out of the Gentiles nations have been grafted into this “wild olive tree,” which now represents the temporal N.T. (visible) churches. The warning of God to the visible churches, is that unfaithful members can be cut out of the “wild olive tree” as easily as unfaithful Jews were cut off earlier.

All of which means, the “wild olive tree” by nature, is similar to the sanctified, but largely unsaved nation of Israel. The N.T. visible churches are temporal, and earthly, and therefore likened to the Israel nation. An unfruitful branch, whether from the nation of Israel, or from within the congregations represented in Christendom, may be sanctified and considered holy for a time, but if they fail to “continue in His goodness,” they, too, will be cut off as unfruitful branches.

Just because one is biologically a Jew, does not mean one will receive the mercy and salvation of God. Just because one is a member of a church or congregation, does not mean that one has been saved.

The “wild olive tree” does not represent the true, invisible church body of Christ.

There is no language used about “grafting in” or “cutting off branches” in this particular body, for the spiritual “Israel” is eternal and permanently brought into union with Jesus Christ. This is the very spiritual body of the “Israel of God;” the spiritual body of Christ. The betrothed, Bride of Christ. These members will never be “cut off”, but these will be kept by Christ’s Mediatorship as their High Priest at the right hand of God in heaven at the throne of grace. (Hebrews 4:14-16)

Therefore, there is no teaching of any kind of reconciliation between earthly Israel with spiritual Israel in the eternal Kingdom of God. The only reconciliation taught in the Bible is the supernatural reconciliation between sinners and God, that was accomplished
by Jesus Christ on the cross.

Moreover, Christ work on the cross reconciled the flesh with the promise.

Sorry, but this amounts to "jargon." I highly suggest you cease referring to national, ethnic Israel, as “flesh.” It is not biblical, and very misleading. (The Greek word, “Sarx” as used in Romans 9, refers to ungodly, carnal human nature in general . . .not to unsaved Israel.)

First there were two men born from different mothers to symbolize the children of the flesh and promise; one born from a bondservant the other from a free woman to symbolize the older serving the younger. Then two men were born twins from one mother, symbolizing the children of the flesh and promise.

These truths teach Godly selection between men. God elects to save children according to promise (represented in the person of Jacob), but leave others in their sins (represented in the person of Esau).

Ishmael and Esau were not saved by God, but perished in their sins, outside of the love of Christ. There is no scripture that speaks of ungodly men being reconciled with Godly men. Rather, Scripture clearly makes distinction between the two kinds of mankind; that distinction according to the sovereign will and good pleasure of God, alone:

“For He says to Moses, ‘I will have mercy on whomever I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whomever I will have compassion.’ So then, it is not of him who wills, nor of him who runs, but of God who shows mercy.” Romans 9:15&16, Exodus 33:19, cp. Ephesians 2:1-10

So you’re saying that all the descendants of Isaac and Jacob came to Christ?

No, I am saying that Isaac and Jacob were of the Godly lineage prepared by God to receive the Covenant promises of grace; from whom the Messiah eventually was produced. Not all of their lineage were blessed and saved by God; Esau being an obvious example.

Election is now conditioned upon faith according to the foreknowledge of God

I disagree. Faith is not theconditional means to getting elected. Unconditional, sovereign election by God, produces and guarantees faith.

The foreknowledge of God is not causal. IOW’s God does not look into time future, to see what men will decide to do, and then chooses men according to their actions or decisions. God does not elect men according to their so-called virtuous abilities to believe and repent. This is the Arminian view, that makes God a reactionary, rather than a Sovereign.

The Reformed view is that men believe and repent according to the results of Godly election, not vice-versa. God does not choose to save according to what man chooses. God elected His saints before the foundation of the world (Eph. 1:3&4), before any were born to do good or bad:

“For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth.” Romans 9:11

God knows all things, but the “foreknowledge” of God is biblically applied to His elect people. There is an intimate relationship between God and those He elected and chose in Christ before the foundation of the world.

It is in this biblical, intimate sense of knowing aforehand that the Scripture says:

“For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.” Romans 8:29

“Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ: Grace unto you, and peace, be multiplied.” I Peter 1:2

Godly election is founded upon whom God loved and knew before He created. All the saints of God were loved within the heart of God and known by name within the mind of God, before time, and before their creation, when He gave them to the Christ to be justified in time, and saved unto everlasting life and glory.

Consider these Scriptures that teach that God “foreknew” His children, with an intimate “knowing” such is used to describe a husband intimately “knowing” his wife:

“I am the good shepherd; and I know My sheep, and am known by My own.” John 10:14

“. . The Lord knows those who are His . . .” II Timothy 2:19

“My beloved is mine and I am His . . .” Song of Solomon 6:3, 7:10

“ . . In love having predestinated us to adoption as sons by Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the good pleasure of His will, to the praise of the glory of His grace, by which He made us accepted in the Beloved.” Ephesians 1:4b-6

“. . . These are the ones who follow the Lamb wherever He goes. These were redeemed from among men, being the firstfruits to God and to the Lamb.” Rev. 14:4b

God has full knowledge and knows all about the hearts and doings of of all men; unsaved or saved, but God did not “foreknow” all men like God “foreknew” His elect “sons.” To be loved by God is to be known by the Father, IN the Son.

Reprobates were never intimately loved and known by God, as the elect “sons of God”. In fact, on the day of judgment, Jesus will declare to all such reprobates, in this world:

“I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.” Matthew 7:23

Such is the teaching of:

“Jacob I loved; Esau I have hated.” Romans 9:13


Esau represent all those reprobate souls who exist outside of Jesus Christ. Esau represents all reprobate “vessels of dishonor” only tolerated by God in order to work all things together for those who love Him. Such vessels are “prepared for destruction.”

“The Lord has made all for Himself; yes, even the wicked for the day of doom.” Proverbs 16:4

Esau was never intimately loved or “known” by God. Esau was not foreknown or loved by God, so Esau was not elect to be chosen in Christ. It was God’s will and elective decree not to provide salvation for Esau as an individual. Esau was born and remained a reprobate child of flesh, and the issue of that flesh was an ungodly nation.

In order to produce the “Seed” promised (Jesus Christ the Savior), God protects and continually delivers the godly from amongst the ungodly and reprobates of this world.

Pharoah is a biblical type of all reprobate souls; the personification of a “vessel of dishonor.” (Romans 9:17-22)

Paul is also showing that these choices do not necessarily concern salvation. As Paul explains:

20Now in a great house there are not only vessels of gold and silver but also of wood and clay, some for honorable use, some for dishonorable. 21Therefore, if anyone cleanses himself from what is dishonorable, he will be a vessel for honorable use, set apart as holy, useful to the master of the house, ready for every good work (2 Timothy 2:20-21).

Another inaccuracy. A dishonorable vessel is temporal and “prepared for destruction.” Romans 9:22 The scriptures you quote are more accurately interpreted by considering the teaching in I Cor. 3:12-15.

God gives everyone a chance to cleanse him or herself from dishonor through faith in Christ.

How exactly can sinners “cleanse” themselves “Without the shedding of blood there is no remission of sins.” (Hebrews 9:22) Can you describe the mechanics of this supposed self-salvation?

Nang you took the opportunity to make a general thesis statement regarding your views (outside the purview of Romans 9), which necessitates a response. . .Reformed believers posit man has no free will,

I formally object against your insertion of this subject into this debate. I have taken no such “opportunity” to bring up the matter of “free will”in this thread.

You are the challenger of this debate and it was your request we focus on Romans Chapter 9. I am remaining faithful to that request, and will not let even you, as challenger, lead me off down a rabbit trail; as enjoyable as such discussion would be.

So when we properly dissect this chapter we find that it is consistent with the rest of Scripture and it reveals a cooperative role for man.

Where? How did national Israel cooperate with God? Where did Jacob cooperate with God or Esau cooperate with God? Where did Pharoah cooperate with God? Where did the “vessels of wrath” cooperate with God? I do not see where even the “vessels of mercy “ cooperating with God. What are you talking about?

God’s grace is Christ. Through His death He eradicated law-based righteousness, which was always impossible to adhere to. . .

. . .Through His obedience unto death, Jesus Christ fulfilled all the law and righteousness. . .

. . .When Christ was resurrected His light shined in every heart. . .

. . .Moreover, not believing that Christ came to forgive the sins of the world makes a liar out of God. That’s what His word states, and that is what we’re to believe. Moreover, not believing that God wants to save all people and forgives all sins hinders perfect love (See 1 John 4). We are to love our enemy because God wants even them to be saved; because Jesus shines light even in their hearts. . .

Are you debating or preaching?

Are we still in Romans Chapter 9?

Nang

[bridgeforsale]

Nang thanks for you’re rebuttal. I did veer for a moment; but in fairness you did lay out an overall position statement in your opening (I merely wanted to do the same). Just to clarify exactly what we are debating. I do not dispute that Romans 9 is showing the election of the children of the promise (by grace through faith).

What I dispute is that this chapter shows particular election. Paul uses the same allegories throughout all of his writings. When he refers to Sara and Rebekah it is a reference to two covenants, two nations, and ultimately the reconciliation between the two.

21Tell me, you who want to be under the law, are you not aware of what the law says? 22For it is written that Abraham had two sons, one by the slave woman and the other by the free woman. 23His son by the slave woman was born in the ordinary way; but his son by the free woman was born as the result of a promise.

24These things may be taken figuratively, for the women represent two covenants. (Galatians 4:21-24).


The promise was continually narrowed. First two men born from two women (one from a slave the other from a freewoman symbolizing the older shall serve the younger). Then two men born from the same womb; representing two nations. Then one man who made the two (Jacob and Esau / Children of the flesh and promise) into one.

14For he himself is our peace, who has made the two one and has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility, 15by abolishing in his flesh the law with its commandments and regulations. His purpose was to create in himself one new man out of the two, thus making peace, 16and in this one body to reconcile both of them to God through the cross, by which he put to death their hostility. 17He came and preached peace to you who were far away and peace to those who were near. 18For through him we both have access to the Father by one Spirit (Ephesians 2:14-18).

Paul also refers to this reconciliation in Romans 11:

For if their rejection is the reconciliation of the world, what will their acceptance be but life from the dead? (Romans 11:15).


Ultimately the symbolism of “the same womb” is a reference to Christ. Paul is showing the reader that the first covenant law was always made for destruction. This is the use he makes out of the term vessel.

24These things may be taken figuratively, for the women represent two covenants. (Galatians 4:24).


Paul is showing his Jewish reader, by reaching back into the scriptures they were raised with, that this is what God always intended. It was always God’s plan to save the children of the promise and to reconcile the flesh (which symbolizes the law) with the promise (those with faith) by destroying the flesh (again, the law or “old” covenant). This is how the “older” serves the younger.

I will concede one point upon further reflection. In Romans 11, the revelation that God will remove all Godlessness from Jacob is a reference to the children of the promise (not national or “blood” Israel). In other words all Israel will be saved but those who Paul is targeting in his letter thought was Israel (the blood descendants of Abraham) are not Israel.

So then we agree that Romans 9-11 is showing the election of the children of the promise and we agree that God’s intention is to save ONLY those with faith in Christ (not national Israel).

God designed his plan with Christ in view. God also orchestrated this symbolism in order to give Paul a tool to one day show the true purpose of old covenant history.

First I want to show the tenor of the entire epistle to the Romans (which is important in understanding chapter 9).


22Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools 23and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles. (Romans 1:22-23)

Only the 7,000 who did not bow to the pagan god baal were innocent of this departure from faith.

21But now a righteousness from God, apart from law, has been made known, to which the Law and the Prophets testify. 22This righteousness from God comes through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe. There is no difference, 23for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24and are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus. 25God presented him as a sacrifice of atonement,[i] through faith in his blood. He did this to demonstrate his justice, because in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished— 26he did it to demonstrate his justice at the present time, so as to be just and the one who justifies those who have faith in Jesus.

27Where, then, is boasting? It is excluded. On what principle? On that of observing the law? No, but on that of faith. 28For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from observing the law. (Romans 3:21-28)

So what does by grace through faith mean? As we see here God’s grace was expressed by giving his son as a propitiation for the sins of the world. In verse 23 and 24 it states we are all sinners and are all justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is Jesus Christ.
So what is the grace that is a gift from God?

3What does the Scripture say? "Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness."[a] 4Now when a man works, his wages are not credited to him as a gift, but as an obligation. 5However, to the man who does not work but trusts God who justifies the wicked, his faith is credited as righteousness.(Romans 4:3-5)

The grace of God or his gift to us was Christ, his atonement for all sins, & access to righteousness imputed through faith (not by works “of the law”). It is not particular, as Romans 3 explains, it is given to all (through faith).

Also consider this passage:

1Therefore, since we have been justified through faith, we[a]have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, 2through whom we have gained access by faith into this grace in which we now stand. (Romans 5:1-2)

This “peace” from God is a reference to the reconciliation between the flesh and the promise. I do not mean this in a way that implies “national Israel” is saved. The destruction of the flesh symbolizing the law was accomplished to break down the barrier between the two. Now all, Jew and Gentile alike, have access to grace (atonement) through faith.

16Again, the gift of God is not like the result of the one man's sin: The judgment followed one sin and brought condemnation, but the gift followed many trespasses and brought justification. (Romans 5:16)

18Consequently, just as the result of one trespass was condemnation for all men, so also the result of one act of righteousness was justification that brings life for all men. (Romans 5:18)

As we can see here this reconciliation is available to all mankind.

10I found that the very commandment that was intended to bring life actually brought death.(Romans 7:10)

As we see here Paul is building up to his message that the law was intended for destruction.

13for, "Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved."[f]
14How, then, can they call on the one they have not believed in? And how can they believe in the one of whom they have not heard? And how can they hear without someone preaching to them? 15And how can they preach unless they are sent? (Romans 10:13-15).

Notice the distinction Paul makes between those who call on the Lord and those who are sent (or called) by the Lord.

18But I ask: Did they not hear? Of course they did:
"Their voice has gone out into all the earth,
their words to the ends of the world. (Romans 10:18)

Notice the “voice has gone out into all the earth.”

Now let’s put our magnifying glass (in these last rounds) on where we disagree (since we seem to agree on more than probably either of us anticipated). You think Jacob and Esau and Paul’s use of the Pharaoh from Exodus is a reference to particular election. I believe it is showing the mechanics of God’s plan. Paul is reaching back into first covenant scripture to show what the symbolic purpose of God’s choices were. Paul shows how the birth of Isaac and Ishmael, then Jacob and Esau contained symbolic importance that was not apparent prior to Christ and Paul’s ministry.

First with reference to who was saved from first covenant history? You stated:

There were 7000 individuals who had not bowed the knee to Baal, at the time Elijah received this revelation (I Kings 19:18), but these were not the only souls saved during the entire O.T. period. You fail to mention all the faithful saints saved prior to Elijah’s lifetime; i.e. Abel, Seth, the Godly lineage that led to Noah, Noah’s sons, Job, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, Joshua, Caleb, Rahab, etc. etc.

(Are you disagreeing with the Scriptures I presented regarding the prophecies about the numbers saved, as being as “the sand of the sea?” If not, you might want to review that portion of my first rebuttal.)

Regardless, again you state my argument. Paul is teaching Godly election of a remnant of individuals (numbers, unknown), according to the Covenant promises of grace.

Indeed I do not dispute that all of these individuals were saved. I merely mention the 7,000 who did not bow to baal as an example (I do not posit that they’re the only ones from first covenant history who were saved). I do; however, dispute your interpretation of how Paul uses his reference to the 7,000 who did not bow to baal. This was used to show faith based salvation not particular election. That God foreknew those who will and will not have faith (and thus elected the former) I do not dispute. However, Paul is merely showing what election is based on (IMO you’re misconstruing the meaning of grace). He is showing that salvation is “conditioned” on faith.

14For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us;

15Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace;

This is not “grafting” national Israel into the “spiritual Israel.” This passage teaches God breaking down the cultural differences between Jews and Gentiles, in order to build one invisible, heavenly church body of Christ. God has reconciled the N.T. Gentiles with the remnant of saved O.T. Jewish saints, making them one in Christ. (See Ephesians 4:4-6.)

I did not say God is grafting national Israel in with Spiritual Israel (although my error regarding the ultimate salvation of Israel, which I conceded above, would logically lead you to this conclusion). In this particular area I remain consistent. Jesus came down, born from a single womb, as representative of both the flesh (old covenant law) and spirit (new covenant children of the promise). He destroyed the enmity between the two by destroying the “older” or the law that stood between them. This is clearly revealed by Paul (as explained above). Thus, now ALL have access to atonement through faith.

First there were two men born from different mothers to symbolize the children of the flesh and promise; one born from a bondservant the other from a free woman to symbolize the older serving the younger. Then two men were born twins from one mother, symbolizing the children of the flesh and promise.

These truths teach Godly selection between men. God elects to save children according to promise (represented in the person of Jacob), but leave others in their sins (represented in the person of Esau).

Ishmael and Esau were not saved by God, but perished in their sins, outside of the love of Christ. There is no scripture that speaks of ungodly men being reconciled with Godly men. Rather, Scripture clearly makes distinction between the two kinds of mankind; that distinction according to the sovereign will and good pleasure of God, alone:

[B]6It is not as though God's word had failed. For not all who are descended from Israel are Israel. 7Nor because they are his descendants are they all Abraham's children. On the contrary, "It is through Isaac that your offspring will be reckoned." 8In other words, it is not the natural children who are God's children, but it is the children of the promise who are regarded as Abraham's offspring. 9For this was how the promise was stated: "At the appointed time I will return, and Sarah will have a son.” (Romans 9:6-9)

This is showing that through a promise his descendants were reckoned. This promise was based on faith (as Paul explains in the beginning of his letter to the Romans). Abraham believed God and it was credited to him as righteousness. Based on that faith a promise was transferred. It is those who believe God who inherit the promise, or this imputation of righteousness.

24These things may be taken figuratively, for the women represent two covenants. (Galatians 4:24).

Sara and the bondwoman, one a slave the other free, one who gave birth to the older the other the younger, represent two covenants (the old and the new, which Paul references by his older, younger dichotomy).

10Not only that, but Rebekah's children had one and the same father, our father Isaac. (Romans 9:10)

Jacob and Esau were born by one father, as was Christ.

Paul is showing that God only offers salvation through faith; and it does not depend on our will or effort. Salvation is offered on God’s terms not ours. God’s decision to save the children of the promise (those who will have faith) was not based on whether or not we’ve sinned (for they did not yet do anything good or bad). In fact Christ destroyed the law and sin with it (through his sacrifice) in order to dispel the notion that salvation is based on empty works from the law.

Does not the potter have power over the clay, from the same lump to make one vessel for honor and another for dishonor? (Romans 9:21)

The same lump of clay here is an allegorical reference to Rebekah. The two vessels are representative of Jacob and Esau. However, it has larger meaning.

What if God, wanting to show His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, 23 and that He might make known the riches of His glory on the vessels of mercy, which He had prepared beforehand for glory, 24 even us whom He called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles? (Romans 9:22-24)

The destiny of first covenant law (represented by Esau) was for destruction. However, its purpose was to show the vessels of mercy (children of the promise represented by Jacob) the riches of his glory. God decreed from before the founding of the world to save a people in Christ. The purpose of the old covenant law was to facilitate this (not to save national Israel as many Jews erroneously thought). Many out of the Jewish people needed to be hardened in order to accomplish this. It was through the law that they were hardened. In order for people to be chastised for sin and want redemption the law was necessary. In order for Christ to be crucified there had to be some (notably Jewish leaders like the Pharisees) who would hate him.

This is what the Jewish people were chosen for. They were not chosen for salvation per se (although faith based salvation was still available to them, in accordance with God’s mercy, since some of them were saved through faith). They were chosen to bring forth the seed of Christ, bring forth the law to ensure recognition of sin (so many would eagerly seek redemption), and so some of them would hate Christ (to ensure he was crucified).

God made these inscrutable judgments in accordance with his elective purposes. While all were afforded an opportunity for salvation through faith, in accordance with Mercy, the law was designed to ensure a sufficient number would reject this. However, while this was God’s design they all had the opportunity to freely accept or reject God.

This was the significance of bringing the Exodus story of the Pharaoh into this chapter. Paul was showing two things. God made his judgments according to his elective purpose (to save through faith), without regard to works (anything good or bad we have done). Like God decreed to make the old covenant law for destruction and to use many of its people as vessels for common use (e.g. the Pharisees) he likewise also used the Pharaoh.

However (before you go thinking we agree too much ) the ability to be used as a vessel for honorable use or dishonorable use lies within each of us.

20Now in a great house there are not only vessels of gold and silver but also of wood and clay, some for honorable use, some for dishonorable. 21Therefore, if anyone cleanses himself from what is dishonorable, he will be a vessel for honorable use, set apart as holy, useful to the master of the house, ready for every good work (2 Timothy 2:20-21).

21nor will people say, 'Here it is,' or 'There it is,' because the kingdom of God is within[a] you."(Luke 17:21)

As our differences have narrowed somewhat I think I can stop here. Perhaps in the last rounds we can just focus in on our differences regarding Romans 9. For example, here:

It is my contention that Romans 9reveals the application of Godly grace to a particular, remnant of individuals, known by God; elect and called out from of the nation of Israel. (Romans 9:6-8, 11, 13, 15, 16, 18, 20, 23-27, 29.

you state you’re interpretation of verses from Romans 9, without any reasoning. So it’s hard for me to rebut? Anyway, great debate so far.



God Bless,
AW

[Nang]

Hello again AW,

The following is a compilation of definitions garnered from your last challenge. I titled them in order to give answer according to the specific subjects you raised:



#1. Reconciliation

Godly reconciliation was the priestly work of Jesus Christ on the cross. There, He bore the sins of His people, in order that they might be justified and made fit to be given access to God:

[B] "Wherefore in all things it behooved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people." Hebrews 2:17

This reconciliation is between sinful men and their Maker. This reconciliation is the restoration of fellowship between man and God, that was broken by Adam in the garden.

The purpose of this reconciliation, was:

“That they all may be one, as You, Father, are in Me, and I in You; that they also may be one in Us, that the world may believe that You sent Me, and the glory hich You gave Me, I have given them, that they may be one just as We are one. I in them, and You in Me; that they may be made perfect in one, and that the world may know that You have sent Me, and have loved them as You have loved Me. Father, I desire that they also whom You gave Me may be with Me where I am, that they may behold My glory which You have given Me; for you loved Me before the foundation of the world. O righteous Father! The world has not known You, but I have known You; and these have known that you sent Me. And I have declared to them Your name, and will declare it, that the love with which You loved Me may be in them, and I in them.” John 17:21-26

The basis of reconciliation was the Godly love, foreknowledge, and predestination to everlasting life of God of these particular persons. The mechanics of this reconciliation was the Person and Mediatorship of Jesus Christ. The results of this reconciliation is that the “sons of God” now have access to the throne of grace in heaven (Heb. 4:14-16), and the assurance of everlasting life and glory. (Romans 8:30)

These the Father gave the Son, to reconcile and bring into heavenly union with the Godhead, are none other than the “vessels of mercy” described by Paul in Romans 9:23:

“. . Which He had prepared for glory.” “They also whom You gave Me may be with Me where I am, that they may behold My glory which You have given Me.” John 17:24

AW’s reference to Ephesians 2:14-18 would be better used as his definition of “peace,” not “reconciliation.” For, in Christ, Jew and Gentile individuals have together been raised to new life in Christ, and find the peace of fellowship as Christian brethren. It is this single spiritual, invisible church body of Jesus Christ that is taught and described by Paul in the epistle to the Ephesians. It is the election of the particular saints (from both O.T.and N.T. eras) that make up this spiritual body, that Paul refers to as “children of promise,” and “vessels of mercy” in his letter to the church at Rome.

Jesus Christ came as federal head and representative of this spiritual body, alone. Only these would ever be acceptable with God, only because they would be “accepted in the Beloved.” (Ephesians 1:3-6) Only these are named “children of promise.” And only for the purpose of redemption, were the promises of a Savior made to these elect persons.

Godly reconciliation and justification was particular in nature, and not worked by God for all men in the world. The Father sent the Son, not for the world at large, but only for those loved, foreknown, and predestined to glory before the foundation of the world. Jesus did not even pray for (let alone reconcile) the world at large, but He prayed only for those who were given to Him from the Father:

“I pray for them, I do not pray for the world, but for those whom You have given Me, for they are Yours. And all Mine are Yours, and Yours are Mine, and I am glorified in them.” John 17:9&10



#2 Law

The purpose of the Law was to reveal sinfulness:

“. . .When the commandment came, sin revived and I died.” Romans 7:9

It is by contrasting one’s life to the perfect, moral law of God, that one grasps how far short they fall from the holiness of God:

“Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law, that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world become guilty before God. Therefore, by the deeds of the law no flesh will be justified in His sight, for by the law is the knowledge of sin.” Romans 3:19&20

It is the person who is convicted and convinced, by the Holy Spirit, of their guilt and God’s righteousness, by exposure to the law, who will be drawn to Christ according to their desperate need of a Savior:

“Therefore, the law was our tutor to bring us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith.” Galatians 3:24

The law was not designed to work rejection. Sin works rejection. Rejection of God’s word and promise was not just Jewish. Rejection (unbelief) results from the sinful human nature of all mankind.


“The Scripture has confined all under sin, that the promise by faith in Christ Jesus might be given to those who believe.” Galatians 3:22

Reconciliation with God does not destroy powers of sinful flesh. Christians remain in bodies of flesh, and the law of sin remains in their members. (Romans 7:14-25) It is only through the “law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus,” that brings victory from the law of sin and death. (Romans 8:2).

The law does not produce flesh. Flesh (unbelieving, carnal persons) produce sin, and the law reveals the sins. See Romans 7:5


Thus, there is no theoretical “reconciliation” between law and promise, as stated. Both the law of sin, and the law of the Spirit, exist within a believer, often causing great tension and wretchedness, as expressed by Paul in Romans 7:14-24. In fact, only Christians will experience this tension and grieve over their inherent sinfulness. (Unbelievers do not know this tension between right and wrong, but are only willing and happy to do what is sinful.)

Much is made about the older serving the younger, but this cannot (even allegorically) be applied to the covenants, for the old covenant does not serve the new covenant, and the new covenant of grace replaces the old covenant of law. Christians live according to grace, not the old system of formal laws and ordinances and works.

The Law was not necessary to ensure that Christ would be crucified. Jesus Christ is “The Elect One of God” (Isa. 42:1); the “Lamb slain before the foundation of the world” (Rev. 13:8); predestined by God to destroy the power of the devil and provide everlasting life for His brethren. IOW’s, the surety of Christ’s death on the cross, resides in the sovereign will and purposes of God.

Also, the Law has not been destroyed or undone. The Law of God still works to convict sinners. The Law of God is eternal, for the commands are the very Word of God. See Matt. 24:35)

#3 Election

AW denies election is particular in nature, while at the same time, agreeing with me that Romans 9 reveals “the election of the children of promise,” and his agreement that it was God’s intention “to save only those with faith in Christ (not national Israel).” I would contend this last statement indeed describes “particular election.”

As soon as a person concedes that Godly election unto everlasting life is not national or corporate in nature, as AW wisely comprehends, one has established particular election. If not all the Jews were saved in the past and not all the Jews will be saved in the future, then one must conclude, according to Paul’s teachings in Romans Chapter 9, that only a remnant of Jews have been elected by God for salvation. Jacob represents these elect Jews. Esau represents the nation as a whole, that has been cast off from God’s favor. The elect Jews are likened to “vessels of mercy,” and the non-elect Jews are likened to “vessels of wrath.”

And the entire chapter teaches it is God who determines who will receive mercy and who will not. (e.g. Pharoah) See Romans 9:15-18

This teaching of particular election does not just pertain to Jews. This teaching in Romans 9:15, 17 are quotes from Exodus 33:19 and Exodus 9:16, where God taught Moses about particular grace. God has always elected to save individuals from their sins and deserved consignment to death and hell. The grace of God shines throughout Scripture. Particular election has been demonstrated throughout all of history; starting with God choosing to favor Abel over Cain; Seth’s lineage over the ungodly of the world; and Noah “found grace in the eyes of God” (Genesis 6:8) being sanctified and spared the universal judgment that came upon all other men.

Thus, I agree with another one of AW’s statements regarding election, which was “ . . individual’s [are] saved according to promise and grace.” Is that not the very definition of “particular election?” I say it is, and I am glad AW sees this truth.

As I stated in my opening post, there are different usages and teachings of election in the bible, and indeed, national Israel was elected by God to produce the Messiah; the promised “Seed;” Jesus Christ the Savior. However, this election was worked by God for earthly, temporal purposes, and was not meant to save the nation as a whole . . . as AW agrees.

The election of those particular persons called from out of the nation of Israel, who would be “accepted in the Beloved,” (Eph. 1:6) is a soteriological election determined by God, which is strictly according to His foreknowledge, love, and grace.

I would also contend that AW’s latter statement also describes “Unconditional Election,” considering the biblical fact that it is by the grace of God, through faith, that men are saved . . .”and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God.” Ephesians 2:8b

Faith is not an inherent attribute of mankind. Not even innocent Adam possessed faith in God before the fall, else Adam would have believed God and would not have sinned against God. Due to the corruption of the human nature, I would go so far as to say it is impossible for fallen man to believe in God and repent of his sins. Fallen man has no capacity with which to function spiritually. Fallen man is non-functional (“dead”) and therefore unable to understand the things of God, let alone do them. Jesus taught:

“. . Unless one is born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.” John 3:3

This means, not a single unregenerate, unsaved, fallen man, dead in his sins, can comprehend (“see”) the spiritual truths about God. Without the presence of the Spirit of Life in Christ, the natural man cannot believe the gospel. Scripture says one must have the Holy Spirit of God to discern the spiritual truths of God:

“. . Even so, no one knows the things of God except the Spirit of God. Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, that we might know the things that have been freely given to us by God . . .But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.” I Cor. 2:11b, 12, 14

So how can unsaved, dead, unregenerate men believe in God, if they have no faith, and how can they have faith, without the Spirit of God indwelling their hearts and souls? They can’t. They cannot believe and they cannot repent, for these are spiritual things, discerned only through the Holy Spirit.

Faith to believe the promises of the gospel comes by the grace of God; “it is the gift of God” . . .”freely given.”

So how does this “gift of faith” become a condition for election? It doesn’t. Gifts are not conditional. The gifts of God are “freely given.”

To say that election is conditional upon the person first believing and exhibiting faith, makes election a reward earned and merited by the sinner. By doing something (i.e. believing), the sinner has acted to gain favor with God. Which makes faith and election to be a work of man, not God. And if faith and election are the result of human works, then salvation is achieved under law, and not according to God’s free grace, which is blasphemous and totally unbiblical.

Faith is not a prerequisite for salvation. Faith is the fruit and evidence of salvation freely gifted from God.

If faith is made a prerequisite to salvation, then Godly grace is no longer grace. Men would be achieving a self-salvation, which is the false gospel of “works-righteousness,” and the old heresy of Pelagianism (synergism).



#4 Promise

#5 Children of Promise

“For what does the Scripture say?” Say to what question? Question: “What then shall we say that Abraham our father has found according to the flesh?”

Was Abraham saved according to any works he did in his flesh? Answer: “If Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God." For what does the Scripture say? "Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.” Romans 4:1-3

This passage is very important. Abraham could not boast about his salvation or about being imputed with righteousness, for two reasons. First, Abraham was saved by grace, not by his own works, and the righteousness that was accounted to Abraham, was not his own righteousness, but it was the righteousness of Jesus Christ legally imputed to his record.

So was Abraham saved because he believed, or did Abraham believe according to the promises and provisions of God? Was Abraham declared righteousness due to his faith, or did Abraham exhibit faith according to the grace of God fulfilling His covenant promise to Abraham? What did the covenant that Abraham believed, actually promise ? The promise from God was stated by David, who is quoted by Paul:

“Blessed are those whose lawless deeds are forgiven, and whose sins are covered; blessed is the man to whom the Lord shall not impute sin.” Romans 4:7&8

The “children of promise” have always been saved according to the grace and power of God alone. The “children of promise” are all the believing saints (O.T. and N.T.) who have been given faith from God, and anointed with His Holy Spirit, to be able to comprehend His Covenant of Grace. This "Everlasting Covenant" contains the promises from God to provide a Savior for the sins of man.

In actuality, all believers are justified and saved under the “New Covenant of Grace,” for no man will see salvation according to doing deeds, or meeting legalistic conditions, under the old covenant of Law. (Romans 3:20)

Abraham exhibited faith in God to provide what was necessary to work salvation, as is revealed in Genesis 22:14, when Abraham named the place where God provided the substitutional blood offering in stead of the life of Isaac:

“Abraham called the name of the place, ‘The-Lord-Will-Provide; as it is is said to this day, “In the Mount of the Lord it shall be provided.”’”

God provided Abraham will all that was needed in order to trust in God and His word. Abraham was not saved by the grace of God apart from the Law.

Abraham represents all believers who are saved by grace and enabled through faith (given from God) to discern and believe the promises of God. Isaac received the same promises, by the grace of God, as did Jacob. This spiritual lineage is distinguished from the biological seed of Abraham who were not gifted with grace or faith to believe; namely Ishmael and Esau, “children of flesh”:

“. . These are not the children of God; but the children of the promise are counted as the seed.” Romans 9:8b

The spiritual “seed” of Abraham are the fulfillment of “the word of God” pertaining to who makes up the true “Israel of God.” (Romans 9:6) The true body of “Israel,” the Christ of God.

There are two kinds of men. From the beginning of time, only two kind of men have been made manifest. Men are either carnal or they are born again, spiritual men. Carnal = children of flesh. Spiritual = children of promise. Esau = carnal man. Jacob = spiritual man. Carnal men = vessels of wrath. Spiritual men = Vessels of mercy.

This historical fact was repeated in the womb of Rebeccah, resulting from the original creation procreation of Adam and Eve. Cain was predestined by God to be carnal; a vessel of wrath. Abel was predestined by God to be spiritual; a vessel of mercy. So has all human reproduction brought forth only two kinds of seed; both according to the sovereign will of God: unregenerate, and regenerate; children of flesh and children of promise. The former being non-elect; the latter being the elect of God. And all the elect, spiritual children of promise, are gifted with faith from God, to believe the covenant promises of God (Eph. 2:8&9) and granted repentance from God, to turn from sin. (II Timothy 2:25, Acts 5:31, 11:18) The vessels of wrath are prepared for Godly destruction (justice), and the vessels of mercy are prepared for Godly glory (grace). (Romans 9:22&23)

I am in agreement with AW’s statement:

“Romans 9-11is showing the election of the children of the promise and we agree that God’s intention is to save ONLY those with faith in Christ (not national Israel).”

I would simply repeat that these elect, children of promise, were distinguished and predestined to glory before creation . . .receiving faith from God as evidence of their election in Christ. These alone are saved by God and these alone will manifest faith in God’s promises, solely due to the free gift of grace.

#6 Peace

It is under this heading, that AW’s teachings about reconciliation should be placed. Only the elect children of promise, saved by faith in Jesus Christ, and reconciled with their Maker due to the cross work of Christ, can reconcile with their brethren in this lifetime. That is because the curse of enmity has been removed. (Galatians 3:13) Christ became a curse for His children, and the enmity imposed upon them which manifests as opposition to God and hatred towards their fellow-man, is replaced with the love of God and the brethren.

Man has been reconciled to God, and has found peace with God. It follows that the spiritual seed; the “children of promise,” who are reconciled and at peace with God, will have peace amongst themselves. As AW says, the cultural barriers come down, for all share the indwelling and sanctification of the Holy Spirit of God. This is the teaching of the Book of Ephesians.

#7 Grace
#8 Vessels

Romans Chapter 9, in my understanding, is the great summary of particular election taught throughout Holy Scripture. Romans 9 denies Universalism. Beginning in the first verses, Paul laments that despite his Jewish brethren being chosen by God according to (temporal) “adoption” as God’s special people, and the giving of the covenants, the law, the tabernacle and temple services, and exposure to God’s promises (See Romans 9:4), most were still not a part of the spiritual body of the true “Israel,” Jesus Christ. (Romans 9:6)

Paul says unfaithfulness of the nation of Israel as a whole, does not mean “that the word of God has taken no effect.” (Romans 9:6) No, God’s word, promises, covenants, and truths exemplified by the Jewish ordinances and law has indeed taken effect. Not for the nation as a whole, but the word of God has taken effect through the salvation of elect Jews called out of the nation by the Spirit of God unto everlasting life in the Kingdom of God.

“Though the number of the children of Israel be as the sand of the sea, the remnant will be saved.” Romans 9:27

These individuals were saved by the sovereign will, choice, and purposes of God, according to election. (Romans 9:11) Jacob is the representative of all these elect Jews, for whom the promises and Covenant of Grace have taken effect; by grace, and not by deeds performed under the old covenant of law. (Romans 9:6-18)

God chooses who will He will show grace and mercy towards. Men do not choose God; God chooses men, according to election and His good purposes. These God has chosen, represented by Jacob, are called “vessels of Mercy,” upon whom God will “make known the riches of His glory.” (Romans 9:23)

And besides these individuals (remnant) called out of the nation of Israel, "prepared for glory,” God has called a remnant “also of the Gentiles.”

“As He says also in Hosea, ‘I will call them My people, who were not My people, and her “beloved,” who was not beloved.’” Romans 9:25

Yes, Romans Chapter 9 teaches salvation that comes by faith in the promises of God, which is the bestowal of Godly grace upon a particular people, consisting of remnants of men out of the nations of the world, according to Godly (sovereign) election.

It is my opinion that Godly grace cannot be properly taught apart from the reality of God choosing His people in Christ, before the foundation of the world. It is this chosen, spiritual seed, that the Father gave to the Son to atone for their sins. These alone out of all the world, were justified by Christ on the cross; called by the Holy Spirit and drawn to belief in the gospel of Jesus Christ, by God’s grace that gifts them with faith to believe and grants repentance to turn from sin.

AW teaches that the grace of God is universal, and common to all mankind. Due to the fact that not all mankind exhibits faith in Jesus Christ, and not all mankind repents from sins, then to consistently hold such a position, it must be taught that the grace and election of God is resistible, or thwarted, or rejected. This would necessarily mean that the Holy Spirit fails to convict all the sinners that Christ died for.

Supposedly, justified men become “unjustified,” due to their free will decision to not believe the good news of salvation. (This would contradict Scripture. For example, see Revelation 22:11 to see the permanency of Godly justification.)

I reject these universal views. God elected a particular people in Christ before He created this world; God the Father gave these particular people to His Son to represent and substitute Himself for in death (John Chapter 17), Christ shed His blood and justified these particular people on the cross; God the Holy Spirit is sent out into the world to gather all these particular, elect, justified people to knowledge of their salvation, through the gift of faith. This was the Trinity fulfilling and performing all Covenant promises for the elect sons of God.

These are the “children of promise” represented by Jacob in Romans 9. These are the “vessels of mercy” created and prepared by God for glory. These particular people are the subject of this book we discuss.

These were chosen, formed, and saved by the will of God. To these “vessels” God gave:

“. . . The right to become children of God, to those who believe in His name: Who were born, not of blood (according to nationality), nor of the will of the flesh (obedience under the Law), nor of the will of man (human belief that merited grace), but of God.” John 1:11&12

Thanks for this pleasant and fruitful discussion,

Nang

[bridgeforsale]

Hello Nang:

Very nice debate so far. I’ll get right to it.

First, I want to express my broader view regarding Romans (chap’s 9-11 in particular).

The symbolic world of Judaism centered around the Torah, temple, land, and racial identity. The Second Temple period was full of festivals, fasts, cult and sacrifice, and customs and taboos. The history of Israel was one in continual exile and the way God would intervene to deliver it.

The great promises made by God according to the Jewish people remained unfulfilled. They thought, we are Israel, the true people of God, not yet fully restored but one day we will be, therefore we look for restoration.

This worldview was practiced by a majority of Jews. Many Jews sought to be obedient to God the best way they could, through intensification of the Torah. The belief in the election of Israel remained constant. However, there was little focus on what they were elected for.

Paul’s Christian theological framework begins with the realization that what God was supposed to do for Israel at the end of history He has done for Jesus in the middle of it. The creator/covenant God had brought His purpose for Israel to fruition through it’s representative, Jesus Christ.

Paul is using his poetic pose to explain the original divine answer to the problem of Adam. What did the promises to Abraham and his family mean; and how they were intended to work? Paul was revealing the covenant faithfulness of God by mapping His righteousness. This letter was to both Jews and Romans. It was meant to dispel the erroneous assumptions taken by both groups. One (the Gentiles) believed in a hybrid sort of replacement theology. The other (Jews) believed the word of God must fail if God didn’t save them based on their ethnic lineage and adherence to the works of the Torah.

In other words the Jews erroneously thought that blood lineage and works demarcated the covenant people of God; whereas the Gentiles felt God had abandoned the Jews almost entirely with a new and different covenant. These Gentiles (like the Jews) didn’t see the continuum, the nexus between the old covenant and Christ. They felt God replaced the Jews with them. They felt they were the new elect; because of God’s wrath toward the Jews for their disobedience.

Paul illustrates to both groups that God’s plan all along had Christ in view. Jesus represents Israel and this is what God always intended. Through faith in Christ, not works, all might be saved, Jew and Gentile alike.

Now the ethnic boasting of the Jews was giving way to the boasting of the Gentiles in their newly found favor with God in contrast to the Jewish people.

Paul explains that both forms of boasting fail to understand how God constructed His plan.

In 4:1 Paul states: “What shall we say? Have we found Abraham to be our forefather according to the flesh”? (implied answer no). Paul is setting up for the message he will unfold in Romans 9.

AW’s reference to Ephesians 2:14-18would be better used as his definition of “peace,” not “reconciliation.” For, in Christ, Jew and Gentile individuals have together been raised to new life in Christ, and find the peace of fellowship as Christian brethren. It is this single spiritual, invisible church body of Jesus Christ that is taught and described by Paul in the epistle to the Ephesians. It is the election of the particular saints (from both O.T.and N.T. eras) that make up this spiritual body, that Paul refers to as “children of promise,” and “vessels of mercy” in his letter to the church at Rome.

Peace and reconciliation are synonymous.

In Ephesians chap. 2 Paul expounds on the idea of reconciliation:

For he himself is our peace, who has made the two one and has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility, by abolishing in his flesh the law with its commandments and regulations. His purpose was to create in himself one new man out of the two, thus making peace, and in this one body to reconcile both of them to God through the cross, by which he put to death their hostility (Ephesians 2:14-16).

The idea expressed here of one man out of two will reappear in Romans 9, where Paul will show how Jacob and Esau were the two men reconciled into one. However, it’s important to note God created Jacob and Esau as representative of two ideas. Jacob was whom the promise (first extended to his grandfather through faith) was extended through; Esau represented “flesh Israel,” or the linear descendants of Abraham.

The promise stated all nations & families of the earth would be blessed through Abraham’s seed (and ultimately through Isaac, Jacob and the Davidic line to Christ). The Jews thought it would be through them that God would save the world. However, Paul dispels this idea:

The promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. The Scripture does not say "and to seeds," meaning many people, but "and to your seed," meaning one person, who is Christ (Galatians 3:16).

Paul dispels the erroneous notion held by the Jews that they were the “seed” whom through the world was to be saved by spelling out in chap. 5 that Christ does more than Adam. The Jews thought Israel’s obedience should have been enough to undo the sins of Adam. This is reverberated in chap’s 2 & 3 where we see the death of Christ functions as the true obedience of Israel.

This deeper meaning can be inferred by the fact Christ was incarnated by the Spirit to a virgin mother; and father from the Davidic line. This is another indicator that it was Spiritual Israel, not flesh Israel, who were always intended to be set apart as the covenant people of God.

The theme of reconciliation is reiterated and intensified in his letter to the Romans, with full rhetorical force. Beginning in chap. 5:

Therefore, since we have been justified through faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have gained access by faith into this grace in which we now stand (Romans 5:1-2).

Jesus Christ came as federal head and representative of this spiritual body, alone. Only these would ever be acceptable with God, only because they would be “accepted in the Beloved.” (Ephesians 1:3-6) Only these are named “children of promise.” And only for the purpose of redemption, were the promises of a Savior made to these elect persons.

Godly reconciliation and justification was particular in nature, and not worked by God for all men in the world. The Father sent the Son, not for the world at large, but only for those loved, foreknown, and predestined to glory before the foundation of the world. Jesus did not even pray for (let alone reconcile) the world at large, but He prayed only for those who were given to Him from the Father:

“I pray for them, I do not pray for the world, but for those whom You have given Me, for they are Yours. And all Mine are Yours, and Yours are Mine, and I am glorified in them.” John 17:9&10

Nang, you’re ignoring John 17:20 “Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word.”

The purpose of the Law was to reveal sinfulness:

We essentially agree here Nang:

The chapters 7 and the beginning 8 explain that the law binds you to Adam. However, by grace we are free to belong to another, Christ. Paul said in 5:20 “in order that sin might abound.” The divine purpose of the Torah was to show Adam’s sin in full height. This is intensified in 7:13:

Was then that which is good made death unto me? God forbid. But sin, that it might appear sin, working death in me by that which is good; that sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful.

Sin was lured into doing its worse in Israel so that its representative would deal it with once and for all.

The hardening of Israel was the means whereby the whole people of God could be saved. There is no room to boast at our comparative favor in God’s eyes as compared to the Jewish people; because they stumbled for our benefit is no reason to regard flesh Israel as cut off forever.

AW denies election is particular in nature, while at the same time, agreeing with me that Romans 9reveals “the election of the children of promise,” and his agreement that it was God’s intention “to save only those with faith in Christ (not national Israel).” I would contend this last statement indeed describes “particular election.”

As soon as a person concedes that Godly election unto everlasting life is not national or corporate in nature, as AW wisely comprehends, one has established particular election. If not all the Jews were saved in the past and not all the Jews will be saved in the future, then one must conclude, according to Paul’s teachings in Romans Chapter 9, that only a remnant of Jews have been elected by God for salvation. Jacob represents these elect Jews. Esau represents the nation as a whole, that has been cast off from God’s favor. The elect Jews are likened to “vessels of mercy,” and the non-elect Jews are likened to “vessels of wrath.”

Of course Nang, you should know I’ve never denied particular election. However, that is outside the purview of this discussion. In my last post I set forth the Scriptural reasoning behind the areas where we disagree. Atonement is universal, grace is resistible, but yes election is particular.

And the entire chapter teaches it is God who determines who will receive mercy and who will not. (e.g. Pharoah) See Romans 9:15-18

This is a good opportunity to segway into the Pharaoh allegory.

I’ve already showed (in my earlier posts) why the use of Sara and the bondservant, Jacob and Esau are representative of two covenants, two nations, and the children of the flesh and of the promise (See also Galatians 4:21-24). The children of the flesh (the “older” Esau) was chosen to serve the children of the promise (the “younger” Jacob) notwithstanding they did nothing good or bad beforehand.

The “hardening” of ethnic Israel was the means whereby the whole people of God can be saved, just as the Pharaoh was a necessary precondition for the Exodus.

The vessel of wrath is an extension of the same idea represented by Esau; law based salvation. Christ destroyed the idea that flesh demarcates the covenant people of God by the sacrifice of His own flesh. Christ didn’t destroy the law per se; rather He destroyed the notion of law-based righteousness, which was the seal of the children of the flesh.

By so doing Christ reconciled the world; both the children of the flesh and of the promise, to God. The dividing wall of ethnic and law based salvation has been forever torn down. Now all have access to faith by grace (expressed by Christ’s atoning work on the cross).

I will stop now in the interest of narrowing the debate. I anticipate we will touch on the more general points you raised (concerning the broader disagreements between Arminianism and Calvinism) in the commentary thread when we’re done here.


God bless Nang & I look forward to our next round.



AW

[Nang]

Hi AW,

Thank you for presenting a concise challenge, and I assume this to be our last round. After I rebut, we will prepare concluding statements. Am I correct?

First, to address your overview of the nation of Israel (which subject also keeps us in bounds of our debate, by bringing us to Romans Chapter 9:1-4):

The father of the nation of Israel was Abraham, who was a recipient and beneficiary of the eternal Covenant of Grace, unilaterally established between Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, before the creation of the world. (The Abrahamic Covenant issued from this “Everlasting Covenant.”) See Titus 1:1&2 Hebrews 13:20, Eph. 1:3-6, Romans 8:29&30, I Peter 1:2

The nation of Israel as a whole, was put under Moses’ Covenant of Law; (which came after the Abrahamic Covenant.)

The Abraham Covenant consisted of all the earthly, material, temporal promises of land given to Abraham and his biological seed.

The temporal promises of land received by Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob were indeed fulfilled after the deliverance of the nation from Egypt, which established the twelve tribes in the promised land. In this geographical area, Israel continued during the years of the judges and God provided them an earthly, theocratic kingdom, ruled by the various kings of Judah and Israel.

So we see, a heavenly, Everlasting Covenant, from which issued the Abrahamic Covenant, under which the Jews functioned according to the Mosaic Covenant of Law.

However, the Abrahamic Covenant was two-fold, and it contained not only
God’s promise of land for the nation of Israel as a whole, but it contained the spiritual promises of a Messiah, who would save a people by grace, through faith, apart from the Law:

“Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.” Romans 3:28

This portion of the Abrahamic Covenant was not promised to all the nation; but to only a spiritual remnant of Abraham’s seed residing within the nation, in the promised land, functioning under the Law. This spiritual remnant of Abraham’s seed were particular Jews who would be saved and justified by faith in the promises of the Messiah. (e.g. Judah, King David, and the Prophets, plus many more.)

This portion of Abraham’s seed then, were rescued from the condemnation that issues from Moses’ Covenant of Law. These given faith in the promises, were “reckoned righteous” and named “children of promise,” under the heavenly Covenant of Grace.

And issuing from these spiritual blessings from the Abrahamic Covenant, came later the Davidic Covenant (Psalm 89:3) giving promise to King David, an eternal kingdom and throne (which was ultimately fulfilled in Christ coming from David’s lineage as King of Israel who would establish the kingdom of heaven according to Everlasting Covenant.)

So to reiterate:

All the seed of Abraham received the covenant promises made by God to Abraham in one form or another. As a whole, the nation received the promises of the land. But there were two covenants in effect within the nation of Israel. Most Israelites lived under the Covenant of Law, but a remnant received the spiritual promises of the Abrahamic Covenant according to the spiritual Covenant of Grace . . .just as Abraham had been saved according to God’s grace through faith before the Covenant of Law had been formally established.

It is vital, when reviewing the O.T. history of the nation of Israel, that these distinctions be kept in mind, otherwise Godly warnings of judgment and wrath versus Godly promises of blessings, are applied to all Jews without warrant. The Jewish children of flesh, received temporal blessings (land), and continual warnings of judgment for their unfaithfulness, but they never received salvation or the spiritual blessing of the everlasting kingdom of heaven. The Jewish “children of promise;” the faithful and spiritual seed of Abraham, alone received salvation unto everlasting life.

(Which leads us to Paul’s teachings of Romans 9:5-13)

The Scriptures that you so often refer to in Galatians 4:22-31, indeed teaches about the differences between the two covenants (Temporal Law vs Everlasting Grace), and the distinctions between the two kinds of seed that issued from Abraham’s body (the “children born after the flesh” vs the “children of promise”). This portion of Scripture establishes an anti-thesis between the two covenants and between the two kinds of men.

And this anti-thesis between ungodly seed and Godly seed, remains. These two kinds of people are never reconciled in the Bible. This anti-thesis and enmity between these two kinds of men has existed since the beginnings:

Cain hated and killed Abel; Abel being a child of promise.
Ishmael hated and persecuted Isaac, who was the child of promise.
Esau hated and fought against Jacob, who was a child of promise.
Unbelieving people of the world oppose and persecute the elect church body of Jesus Christ.

The anti-thesis between the two seeds and two kinds of men, will always exist, and continues to our day:

“Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise. But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now.” Galatians 4:28&29.

“You are of God, little children, and have overcome them, because He who is in you is greater than he who is in the world. They are of the world. Therefore they speak as of the world, and the world hears them. We are of God. He who knows God hears us; he who is not of God does not hear us. By this we know the spirit of truth and the spirit of error.” I John 4:4-6


I dispute that the teachings of Galatians 4:22-31 and Romans 9:5-13 are allegorical. Symbolism is used to describe the two covenants under which these two kinds of men function, but usage of symbolism does not create allegory. The teaching and the application of these passages are literal, for these make reference to actual persons and historical events. Pure allegory uses fictional persons and imaginary events to convey a truth. Thus, the distinction between elect Jacob and non-elect Esau should not be interpreted allegorically. That would be incorrect hermeneutics and misleading exegesis of the contextual and propositional truths taught throughout Romans Chapter 9.

AW:
"The “hardening” of ethnic Israel was the means whereby the whole people of God can be saved, just as the Pharaoh was a necessary precondition for the Exodus. The vessel of wrath is an extension of the same idea represented by Esau; law based salvation."

(Which subject leads us next to Romans 9:14-19)

The hardening of Pharoah, and the hardening of the hearts of all reprobate men, is first according to the sovereign will of God; the purpose of which is to bring good to the elect of God alone. Since there is no such thing as “law based salvation,” I contend this portion of Romans 9 is reiterating the spiritual principle revealed in Genesis 50:20 and Romans 8:28:

“But as for you, ye thought evil against me; but God meant it unto good, to bring to pass, as it is this day, to save much people alive.”

“And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose.”

Upon this very principle, I refute your teachings where you assert that Jesus Christ was representative of the entire nation of Israel. The Son of God only represented, as federal head, the elect persons given to Him by the Father. (John Chapters 10 and 17)

(Leading us next to Romans 9:20-22)

Jesus Christ would not represent those God has chosen to harden in their sins. Those formed by the sovereign hand of God to be “vessels of wrath.” In fact, just the opposite is true. God actively prevents reprobates from believing and finding salvation. Please read Isaiah 6:9&10, Matthew 13:11-17, Luke 8:9&10, John 12:37-40, Acts 28:24-28, and Romans 11:5-10.

Jesus Christ, did not come representing the nation or the land, or an earthly kingdom, for the ungodly, unsaved, unbelieving, unfaithful Israelites had been cast away from God’s favor for 400 some years before the Christ was born. (Hosea 3:4, 4:6, 5:6, 9:17)

(Leading us next to Romans 9:23-28)

The only “Israel” that Jesus Christ represented in His incarnation, consisted of the remnant of spiritual, faithful seed of Abraham saved under the New Covenant of Grace. Jesus Christ came as the sin-bearer of this small remnant of Jews, called by grace and gifted with faith in Godly promises, and as the sin-bearer for the (very few) Gentiles called by grace through faith, before His incarnation, as well. (Romans 3:29, 4:11&12)

“For the promise that he would be the heir of the world was not to Abraham or to his (biological) seed, but through the righteousness of faith.” Romans 4:13

These alone are the spiritual seed of Abraham; the spiritual elect and true “Israel,” whom Christ came in the flesh to represent and to die for as their substitute on the cross. In this way, the “children of promise” realized the spiritual promises of the Abrahamic Covenant.

“And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.” Galatians 3:29

AW: Now the ethnic boasting of the Jews was giving way to the boasting of the Gentiles in their newly found favor with God in contrast to the Jewish people. Paul explains that both forms of boasting fail to understand how God constructed His plan.

(Which subject finishes up Romans Chapter 9 and continues in Paul’s teaching through Romans 11:24)

The Godly warnings that come in this portion of Scripture, continue to teach the anti-thetical distinctions, which manifest between earthly religious entities, and the heavenly, eternal, invisible church body of Jesus Christ.

The “wild olive tree” is representative of the earthly nation of Israel, and the earthly N.T. churches. In both entities, there exists temporal, earthly sanctification of both elect and non-elect persons in the name of God.

However, unfaithful persons can be “broken off” from these visible representations of the people of God (Romans 11:20&21), contrasted with the permanency of saints who are registered in heaven and make up the invisible church body of Christ. (John 10:27-29)

This contrast between God’s church versus the world, is vital to recognize, in order to rightly divide the Word of God.

For exposure to the covenant promises or to the gospel, indeed provide sanctification (e.g. I Cor. 7:14), but such sanctification does not always work salvation.

The nation of Israel being the most obvious example. The Jewish people were delivered from Egypt, baptized in the Red Sea, and sanctified from the other nations in the name of God. All were exposed to and aware of God’s covenant promises, but not all were chosen to be recipients of the spiritual promises contained therein. Only a remnant out of all the nation received the blessings of grace and were declared to be saints of God. That only according to the exhibition of faith; which God provides for His elect remnant, chosen by the Father in the Son.

The N.T. churches also consist of both kinds of men; elect and non-elect. Within the visible church organizations are saved and unsaved persons. Goats congregate amongst the sheep. A church member is sanctified because of exposure to the Word of God, and the gospel preaching, but that sanctification is temporal and does not guarantee salvation. One is not saved by joining a church, or even by being baptized in water or by partaking of communion.

Only the spiritual seed, called “the children of promise” actually receive the anointing of the Holy Spirit, who guarantees salvation and inheritance of glory according to Everlasting Covenant.

“. . Having believed, you were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise, who is the guarantee of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, to the praise of His glory.” Ephesians 1:13b&14

Scripture describes the invisible, permanent, church of Christ, as:

“Ye are come unto Mount Zion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels. To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect.” Hebrews 12:22&23

This is the true “Israel” of God; the spiritual seed of Abraham; the “children of promise;” justified men made perfect by the imputation of Christ’s righteousness.

AW: "Paul will show how Jacob and Esau were the two men reconciled into one."

This is a false conclusion that issues from your faulty premise, as stated earlier. Jacob and Esau were distinguished from each other, and they were never reconciled on this earth, let alone in heaven.

Jacob represents the spiritual seed of Abraham, who will inherit the heavenly kingdom. Esau represents the reprobate, fleshly seed of Abraham, who will never see the kingdom. (John 3:3)

Jacob is a vessel of mercy; Esau was a vessel of wrath.

Paul is revealing in very clear and stark terms, the anti-thesis between “children of promise” and reprobate “children of flesh.” Paul is teaching particular election; not a hypothetical, universal, opportunity of salvation for all.

AW: "you’re ignoring John 17:20“Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word.”

I understand these words differently than you. Christ primarily was referring to His disciples to whom He had chosen during His ministry, and to whom He had given the Word of God. But Jesus is including all the elect of God that would be called to faith and salvation after His death and resurrection. Jesus spoke of the global multitudes who would be saved out of all the nations of the world between His first coming and His second coming. He speaks of His church at large.

AW: "Atonement is universal, grace is resistible, but yes election is particular."

This reveals hermeneutic inconsistency on your part. God’s decree to elect came first, and Godly election was particular in nature. God did not choose all people to be in Christ. God only gave Jesus particular individuals to represent in His flesh. Jesus was sent to die only for these particular people. And only those justified by the blood of Christ receive the grace of God.

IOW’s if the Father elected only a particular people, the work of the Son and the work of the Holy Spirit would necessarily follow suit. The performance of Everlasting Covenant is specific, principled, ordained, particular in nature, and consistent. Atonement is limited because Election is limited. Grace is particular because the Atonement was particular, according to particular Election.

AW: "The dividing wall of ethnic and law based salvation has been forever torn down."

The “barrier” that has been torn down by the coming of Christ, was the religious and cultural barrier that existed between Jews and Gentiles. That is the subject of Paul’s letter to the Ephesians.

AW: "Christ didn’t destroy the law per se; rather He destroyed the notion of law-based righteousness, which was the seal of the children of the flesh. By so doing Christ reconciled the world; both the children of the flesh and of the promise, to God."

You present a faulty premise when you speak of a “law based salvation” and “law-based righteousness.” Such is unknown in Holy Scripture. No soul has ever been saved under the Covenant of Law. Rather, the Law declares all men guilty and fallen short of the glory of God. The Holy Scriptures actually teach:

“Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.” Romans 3:20

I am sorry AW, but there was never a “law-based righteousness” ever to be achieved, except by Jesus Christ Himself. And what “seal” do you speak about? I fear this is just invented language that produces nothing but vague assertion.

Now, if you want to reword these statements to say: “Jesus Christ fulfilled all righteousness under the Law; by which His children were declared guilty for failure to successfully obey; in order to justify them and reconcile them with the Father . . .” then I would understand and agree.

This would be a valid Scriptural argument, for it would accord with II Cor. 5:21 and Philippians 3:9

Respectfully submitted,
Nang

[bridgeforsale]

Hi AW,

Thank you for presenting a concise challenge, and I assume this to be our last round. After I rebut, we will prepare concluding statements. Am I correct?

Hello Nang: yes after you rebut this we wrap it up with closing statements.

First, to address your overview of the nation of Israel (which subject also keeps us in bounds of our debate, by bringing us to Romans Chapter 9:1-4):

The father of the nation of Israel was Abraham, who was a recipient and beneficiary of the eternal Covenant of Grace, unilaterally established between Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, before the creation of the world. (The Abrahamic Covenant issued from this “Everlasting Covenant.”) See Titus 1:1&2 Hebrews 13:20, Eph. 1:3-6, Romans 8:29&30, I Peter 1:2

The nation of Israel as a whole, was put under Moses’ Covenant of Law; (which came after the Abrahamic Covenant.)

So far we agree

The Abraham Covenant consisted of all the earthly, material, temporal promises of land given to Abraham and his biological seed.

The temporal promises of land received by Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob were indeed fulfilled after the deliverance of the nation from Egypt, which established the twelve tribes in the promised land. In this geographical area, Israel continued during the years of the judges and God provided them an earthly, theocratic kingdom, ruled by the various kings of Judah and Israel.

So we see, a heavenly, Everlasting Covenant, from which issued the Abrahamic Covenant, under which the Jews functioned according to the Mosaic Covenant of Law.

However, the Abrahamic Covenant was two-fold, and it contained not only
God’s promise of land for the nation of Israel as a whole, but it contained the spiritual promises of a Messiah, who would save a people by grace, through faith, apart from the Law:

“Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.” Romans 3:28

We still agree

This portion of the Abrahamic Covenant was not promised to all the nation; but to only a spiritual remnant of Abraham’s seed residing within the nation, in the promised land, functioning under the Law. This spiritual remnant of Abraham’s seed were particular Jews who would be saved and justified by faith in the promises of the Messiah. (e.g. Judah, King David, and the Prophets, plus many more.)

Here’s where we depart.

Nor because they are his descendants are they all Abraham's children. On the contrary, "It is through Isaac that your offspring will be reckoned."[b] 8In other words, it is not the natural children who are God's children, but it is the children of the promise who are regarded as Abraham's offspring. 9For this was how the promise was stated: "At the appointed time I will return, and Sarah will have a son."[c]

10Not only that, but Rebekah's children had one and the same father, our father Isaac. 11Yet, before the twins were born or had done anything good or bad—in order that God's purpose in election might stand: 12not by works but by him who calls—she was told, "The older will serve the younger."[d] 13Just as it is written: "Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.” (Romans 9:7-13)

Reflect on how God uses figurative allegory throughout scripture. First, God promises Abraham his barren century old wife would have a child & she does. Think about how this relates to Christ being incarnated by the Spirit rather than the “flesh” seed of the Davidic line? Abraham believed God and his faith was counted toward righteousness; thus the promise was sealed by faith.
Then God instructs Abraham to kill (as Genesis 22:1-12 states) his only son, and sacrifice him:

Then God said, "Take your son, your only son, Isaac, whom you love, and go to the region of Moriah. Sacrifice him there as a burnt offering on one of the mountains I will tell you about." (Genesis 22:2)

Think about how this relates to Christ? Sacrifice his only son! So far I hope you see the relation, because this is at the heart of the message that Paul is revealing here. Jews did not think Christ was the messiah because they believed there were many inconsistencies between the Old Testament prophecies and the story of Jesus. However, Paul is showing them why they are wrong. He is relating these events, which occurred in Genesis, with Jesus.

Now consider the story of Isaac:

Isaac prayed to the LORD on behalf of his wife, because she was barren; and (A)the LORD answered him and Rebekah his wife (B)conceived. (Genesis 25:21)

Again God intervenes to for children in the womb of a barren women. This time; however, God brings forth twins (Jacob and Esau):

The LORD said to her,
"(A)Two nations are in your womb;
(B)And two peoples will be separated from your body;
And one people shall be stronger than the other;
And (C)the older shall serve the younger." (Genesis 25:23)

Two nations, Jacob and Esau!

The older nation (Esau) will serve the younger (Jacob). See Romans 9:12

Then God incarnates Christ from one womb, a flesh man who represents both the children of the flesh and the children of the promise. He reconciles the enmity between the two by destroying the former (the flesh):

For he himself is our peace, who has made the two one and has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility, 15by abolishing in his flesh the law with its commandments and regulations. His purpose was to create in himself one new man out of the two, thus making peace (Ephesians 2:14-15)

Christ in the sacrifice of His flesh destroyed the idea that blood (or flesh) lineage demarcated the covenant people of God. The Jews used the law and its works to set them apart from the rest of humanity. This is also what Christ came to destroy, this was the barrier between God and the world, this is the idea that was represented by Esau (and Ishmael before him), and this is what Paul refers to as the vessel of wrath.

This portion of Abraham’s seed then, were rescued from the condemnation that issues from Moses’ Covenant of Law. These given faith in the promises, were “reckoned righteous” and named “children of promise,” under the heavenly Covenant of Grace.

Your misunderstanding the grace expressed by God when He sacrificed His only Son. The promise was sealed by faith. Those like Moses, Abraham, the 7,000 who did not bow to baal, were not saved because of blood lineage, they were saved through faith. They didn’t even have the benefit of the grace we have today expressed by God through Christ. They had faith in a promise yet unfulfilled. That faith was counted toward righteousness, just as it is today. They trusted God, they relied on God, and they never bowed to a pagan idol.

Sorry to be so brief here, but in the interest of keeping this debate narrow (and I just started a new time consuming job) I have to cut this response short.

God Bless Nang & I will probably have to wait until next week sometime to complete my closing (I have drill with my reserve unit this weekend and we’re going away on an FTX for a few days).

AW

[Nang]

Hello Nang: yes after you rebut this we wrap it up with closing statements.

O.K.

Here’s where we depart.

Nor because they are his descendants are they all Abraham's children. On the contrary, "It is through Isaac that your offspring will be reckoned."[b] 8In other words, it is not the natural children who are God's children, but it is the children of the promise who are regarded as Abraham's offspring. 9For this was how the promise was stated: "At the appointed time I will return, and Sarah will have a son."[c]

10Not only that, but Rebekah's children had one and the same father, our father Isaac. 11Yet, before the twins were born or had done anything good or bad—in order that God's purpose in election might stand: 12not by works but by him who calls—she was told, "The older will serve the younger."[d] 13Just as it is written: "Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.” (Romans 9:7-13)

Reflect on how God uses figurative allegory throughout scripture.

The preceding is not allegory; nor is it "figurative" language.

it is propositional truth. There really were two sons that issued from Abraham, and there really were twins born of Rebeccah. And it is historical fact that Isaac and Jacob were "children of promise" according to Godly Covenant.

First, God promises Abraham his barren century old wife would have a child & she does. Think about how this relates to Christ being incarnated by the Spirit rather than the “flesh” seed of the Davidic line? Abraham believed God and his faith was counted toward righteousness; thus the promise was sealed by faith.
Then God instructs Abraham to kill (as Genesis 22:1-12 states) his only son, and sacrifice him:

Then God said, "Take your son, your only son, Isaac, whom you love, and go to the region of Moriah. Sacrifice him there as a burnt offering on one of the mountains I will tell you about." (Genesis 22:2)

Think about how this relates to Christ? Sacrifice his only son! So far I hope you see the relation, because this is at the heart of the message that Paul is revealing here.

The historical (and spiritual) facts are, though, AW . . .Isaac was not sacrificed like Christ. The lesson of this event, is that God provided a substitutional offering for Abraham, in place of the death of his son, Isaac.

Now consider the story of Isaac:

Isaac prayed to the LORD on behalf of his wife, because she was barren; and (A)the LORD answered him and Rebekah his wife (B)conceived. (Genesis 25:21)

Again God intervenes to for children in the womb of a barren women. This time; however, God brings forth twins (Jacob and Esau):

The LORD said to her,
"(A)Two nations are in your womb;
(B)And two peoples will be separated from your body;
And one people shall be stronger than the other;
And (C)the older shall serve the younger." (Genesis 25:23)

Two nations, Jacob and Esau!

The older nation (Esau) will serve the younger (Jacob). See Romans 9:12

Yes, two individuals are born representing two nations. Jacob representing the spiritual seed of Abraham, who would receive the promises of a heavenly kingdom, and Esau representing the fleshly seed of Abraham who would inherit a temporary, earthly nationality.

Of course, all earthly kingdoms will serve the heavenly.

Then God incarnates Christ from one womb, a flesh man who represents both the children of the flesh and the children of the promise. He reconciles the enmity between the two by destroying the former (the flesh):

For he himself is our peace, who has made the two one and has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility, 15by abolishing in his flesh the law with its commandments and regulations. His purpose was to create in himself one new man out of the two, thus making peace (Ephesians 2:14-15)

The Ephesians passage only applies to the reconciliation in Christ of elect and spiritual seed that issued from Abraham; which happens to include Gentiles along with Jews.

Christ in the sacrifice of His flesh destroyed the idea that blood (or flesh) lineage demarcated the covenant people of God.

The Holy Scriptures distinctly teach that Christ died in the flesh to destroy the power of Satan over the brethren Christ represented in His incarnation (Hebrews 2:14&15). Christ vicariously died the death of the sons of God, promised to Him by the Father, under eternal covenant.

Of course, biological lineage did not save any Jews. But your usage of that fact, as basis for the cross, falls way short of all that Scripture teaches regarding the cross work of Jesus Christ. Way short!

The Jews used the law and its works to set them apart from the rest of humanity. This is also what Christ came to destroy, this was the barrier between God and the world, this is the idea that was represented by Esau (and Ishmael before him), and this is what Paul refers to as the vessel of wrath.

The Mosaic Covenant of Law was imposed upon Israel, by God. The Jews did not "use the Law," but the Law governed the Jews. This was no "barrier between God and the world," but the Law was purposed by God to reveal sin to man and draw the elect to faith in the promised Savior. Ishmael and Esau represented all those who would die under the Law due to unrepentant unbelief. Ishmael and Esau represented all souls not chosen for salvation in Jesus Christ. Ishmael and Esua represented all the reprobates of the world; formed by God to be "vessels of wrath;" prepared for destruction.

Those like Moses, Abraham, the 7,000 who did not bow to baal, were not saved because of blood lineage, they were saved through faith.

I agree with this. These saved by faith, were chosen by God in Christ, before the foundation of the world.

They didn’t even have the benefit of the grace we have today expressed by God through Christ.

I disagee. Abel, Seth, Noah, Job, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, David, and all the O.T. saints were saved by the same grace that the N.T. saints were saved by.

They had faith in a promise yet unfulfilled.

Indeed. That faith in the unseen, was given to them by God, and it was accounted to all the O.T. saints (as listed in Hebrews Chapter 11) as righteousness to their accounts with God. (Imputed righteousness)

That faith was counted toward righteousness, just as it is today.

Yes, we agree.

God Bless Nang & I will probably have to wait until next week sometime to complete my closing (I have drill with my reserve unit this weekend and we’re going away on an FTX for a few days).

AW

That is fine, friend. . . take your time. I know your plate is full.

Thank you again for a fine discussion and debate. We will wrap this up in good spirit, I am sure.

Love in Christ,
Nang

[bridgeforsale]

Hello Nang. The foregoing is my closing statement in our debate.

First I want to deal with Galatians 4.

22For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman.

23But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise.

24Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar.

Isaac and Ishmael, like Jacob and Esau, represented two covenants, two nations.

See also:

The LORD said to her,
"(A)Two nations are in your womb;
(B)And two peoples will be separated from your body;
And one people shall be stronger than the other;
And (C)the older shall serve the younger." (Genesis 25:23)

This is the passage Paul was referring to in Romans 9:10-12

Not only that, but Rebekah's children had one and the same father, our father Isaac. 11Yet, before the twins were born or had done anything good or bad—in order that God's purpose in election might stand: 12not by works but by him who calls—she was told, "The older will serve the younger."


It is emphatically clear that Paul referenced Jacob and Esau figuratively just as the Genesis passages he quoted did. The Pharaoh and vessels of wrath signify the Jewish people (temporarily hardened with regard to faith in Jesus). The figurative reference Paul makes of the Pharaoh is because God hardened him just as many of the Jews were hardened toward Christ to advance His divine plan. Paul never states or otherwise indicates that grace or atonement is limited. Paul is revealing complex elements of God’s plan. For example, this letter is obviously to a predominantly Jewish audience (as it deals with questions of Judaism’s relationship to Christianity). Paul is not saying that the Jewish people are hardened forever – just as the Gentile reprobate have an opportunity at redemption:

[I[28As far as the gospel is concerned, they are enemies on your account; but as far as election is concerned, they are loved on account of the patriarchs, 29for God's gifts and his call are irrevocable. 30Just as you who were at one time disobedient to God have now received mercy as a result of their disobedience, 31so they too have now become disobedient in order that they too may now[h] receive mercy as a result of God's mercy to you. 32For God has bound all men over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all.(Romans 11:28-32)[/I]

Paul is telling his audience of Jewish converts that while he shares their despair over the plight of their ethnic kinsmen; they are wrong to think that blood lineage defines Israel (or Jacob). The elect are those whom God foreknew would respond to His grace.

I do also agree that there “was never any law based righteousness.” However, there was a “wrongly perceived notion” of law / works based righteousness (this is in part what Christ came to destroy and what Paul addresses here in Romans 9). You are correct when you say Jesus fulfilled all the righteousness under the law; however, Romans 9 was dealing with erroneous presumptions within the Jewish community.


Back to Galatians 4:

8Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise.
29But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now.

This verse doesn’t abrogate the idea presented just a few verses earlier that Christ died to make two men (Jacob and Esau used figuratively to represent two covenants / nations) into one. No longer is blood lineage a dividing wall. The people of God are those born of God (or born again). Those not born of God remain in sin and therefore oppose God. Born after flesh and born after spirit doesn’t reference our physical birth -- it is referencing our “rebirth” (this is an important distinction because failing to understand this idea can lead one into the erroneous presumption of irresistible grace).


Election is a very hard topic to grasp; and I for one agree with Martin Luther, who said (I paraphrase) that it should not be a source of division among Christians.

I think when we don’t recognize that Paul is making use of the same figurative illustrations that God did (when examining the similarities, for example, of God asking Abraham to sacrifice his only son as God ultimately did with His own Son, or God ensuring the seemingly impossible conception of children from barren women, just as He did the same with a virgin women, how the extension of election was sealed by faith, etc.) we weaken our own argument as to the validity of Christianity (especially to Jews who do not see the continuum between the OT prophecies and Christ).

I’m sorry to make such short work in my closing statement here; unfortunately my time is more limited than it was a few weeks ago. However, I think I stated all the material points of Romans 9 and I look forward to continuing this discussion in the commentary thread.

AW

[Nang]

In order to present my closing argument for this debate, I have reviewed the entire exchange between myself and Arminius_Wesley, and I will make observations, and then offer final remarks.

AW’s closing argument was brief, due to the fact he is facing time constraints, but I believe the brevity is also attributable to the fact that he had nothing further to add to his challenge, than what he has been repeating in each of the five rounds.

In my review, I observed the following presented on his part:

Unscriptural terms, such as “covenant of faith,” “law-based righteousness,” “law based salvation,” and “ethnic/law based salvation,” and “the old covenant of the flesh “ remaining unclarified, and unexplained. Even though I think I know how AW uses these terms, he never defined them properly for others reading the debate.

I also took note of a general apologetic for “universal” teachings, such as the following quotes (blue font):

ALL be taught by God, and those who listen and learn from Him comes to Christ.
Christ is the bread of life of the WORLD.

God bound all men to disobedience so He could have mercy on them all; through offering His Son to forgive our sins.

When Christ was resurrected His light shined in every heart. This is how He draws all to himself; and this is the grace or divine energy that precedes our choice.

Moreover, not believing that Christ came to forgive the sins of the world makes a liar out of God. That’s what His word states, and that is what we’re to believe.

Moreover, not believing that God wants to save all people and forgives all sins hinders perfect love (See 1 John 4). We are to love our enemy because God wants even them to be saved; because Jesus shines light even in their hearts.

As we can see here this reconciliation is available to all mankind.

The promise stated all nations & families of the earth would be blessed through Abraham’s seed (and ultimately through Isaac, Jacob and the Davidic line to Christ).

(and the quote that still makes me dizzy to read):

God made these inscrutable judgments in accordance with his elective purposes. While all were afforded an opportunity for salvation through faith, in accordance with Mercy, the law was designed to ensure a sufficient number would reject this.

Since we are not debating “Universalism,” I will not comment further than posting my observations, but it does lead into a great inconsistency on AW’s part, considering at several points during the debate, he says he agrees about Godly election:

Again, I present his quotes in blue font; bold emphasis, mine. AW agreeing to particular election:

He’s (Paul) answering questions like: why did God choose Jacob over Esau and the children of the promise over the children of the flesh.

We cannot expect salvation on our terms, it can only occur on God’s terms. It’s God who has mercy after all, it’s God who decides which individuals or groups to either harden or have mercy on. God has decided by eternal decree to have mercy on those who have faith in Christ. (I will address this specifically in my closing remarks.)

The body of Christ is elected; and union with the body of Christ is conditioned on faith.

Just like God made the inscrutable choice between Jacob and Esau He decided to harden the pharaoh to advance His elective purpose.

I do not dispute election; I simply object to double predestination.

Indeed God decreed before the founding of the world to elect a people in Christ.

God only intended to save a remnant from ethnic Israel (blood descendants of Abraham).

it was Spiritual Israel, not flesh Israel, who were always intended to be set apart as the covenant people of God.

Of course Nang, you should know I’ve never denied particular election.

Now, how these admissions of particular election conform to the earlier quotes about universal salvation, I do not know. AW will have to explain further in the commentary thread. And he will also have to explain the following contradictions, still on the subject of particular election:

What I dispute is that this chapter (Romans 9) shows particular election.

The chapter is not an exposition on election. It does show that those grafted into the covenant of faith are the elect; however, it was not designed by Paul to reveal the mechanics of election.

It wasn’t that God decided to only save a particular set of people from among the Jewish people. God ordered events so many Jews would not accept Christ; however, only because this was necessary to spread the word of Christ to the world.

This elective choice (to bring forth Christ from the lineage of Jacob) was not God choosing to save Jacob and not Esau.

The cause of AW’s theological inconsistency, is a faulty premise. He contends that the primary teachings of particular election that are taught by Paul in Romans 9 as well as Galatians 4:21-31, are simply allegory. (I will address AW’s hermeneutics and claims of allegory in my closing remarks.)

Unfortunately, this poor hermeneutic led to some alarming and incorrect Christology, revealed in AW’s challenges. Again I quote:

Christ’s flesh served the children of the promise by His sacrifice on the cross.

Christ’s flesh embodied the perfect Jew. His flesh was perfect in its righteousness in terms of adherence to old covenant law. He was more righteous that the Pharisee’s, His flesh was perfect. It was this idea that He put to death by His work on the cross. The idea that our flesh can attain salvation for our soul is gone forever.

He decreed to destroy the old covenant of the flesh by Christ’s death on the cross and birth a new covenant through His resurrection.

With the death of Christ sin died because so did the legalistic and ritualistic old covenant law.

Christ reconciled flesh and spiritual Israel by destroying the flesh.

Now righteousness is imputed by faith.

Christ work on the cross reconciled the flesh with the promise

Nang you drew a distinction between flesh and spiritual Israel, which IMO fails to consider the fact that Christ reconciled the two through His sacrifice.

Another distinction here is that Christ Himself embodied both the children of the promise and the children of the flesh.


Because of restrictions on length of replies, I will not address these Christological errors now. However, they are very important for the reader to take note of, for one error leads to more error . . .and accordingly I move to the next topic that AW emphasized (again, inconsistently):

That is the matter of “older serving younger” which AW says also represents the two “vessels”. You will note, the “older and younger” are described by AW first as referring to the individual persons of Jacob and Esau, then as covenants “old and new,” then as two nations, and lastly, an order of salvation! Which is it?


Jacob and Esau are spoken of as twins, individuals born one after the other, and the first twin born (elder) eventually serving the younger (Jacob).

The old covenant shall serve the new covenant.

Remember the words the first will be last and the last first. This is a reference to the order of salvation. The Jews, who are the vessels of wrath (at the moment), will be saved last.

two nations were represented. The older nation served the younger by dying. This death (or destruction) of the older nation,

The term the same lump of clay can be traced back to Paul’s earlier reference to Rebekah. She is the lump of clay allegorically referred to and Jacob and Esau are representative of the vessels (the new and old covenants).

This presentation is just as confusing as AW’s various descriptions of who exactly Paul was addressing in Romans 9 to begin with:

Romans 9:1-5 addresses converted Christians

Paul even begins this chapter by a lengthy exhortation to his ethnic kinsmen, the Jewish people.

As Paul explains in his opening exhortation to his ethnic kinsmen

my kinsmen according to the flesh, who are Israelites,

This letter was to both Jews and Romans. It was meant to dispel the erroneous assumptions taken by both groups.

this letter is obviously to a predominantly Jewish audience


The reason I have posted these quotes, is to demonstrate how difficult it has been to keep up with AW, and provide orderly rebuttal. I have tried, and believe I have mostly succeeded to rebut all his challenges, even though the challenges themselves have often fluctuated.

There have been some questions I have asked, that have gone unanswered, but again for brevity sake, I will forego repeating my questions.

All in all, there are two major points to AW’s challenges that I would like to address as my closing remarks.

First, Godly election. I have already shown that AW says he agrees with me that God indeed elects particular people to receive salvation. He even agrees that these elect are scripturally called, “children of promise.” However, AW presents an erroneous basis for Godly election, even while declaring election is indeed by Godly decree!

AW claims that God elects according to His foreknowledge of who will exhibit faith in Him, or not. This is the classic Arminian view.

However, the Reformed view, is taken from the teachings of Paul; primarily from the Romans Chapter 9 that is the subject of this debate. Paul clearly teaches election is based on Godly promises, and Godly promises come from God to mankind according to heavenly Covenant, and heavenly Covenant was established according to Godly decree, and Godly decree was issued according to the sovereign will of God and His good pleasure, alone.

Thus, the bottom line is God’s Sovereign will determined election . . .not God’s foreknowledge about historical people and events. In fact, God has foreknowledge of all that has occurred in time, because He has decreed what will come to pass, and ordained exactly how all would come to pass.

God does not look down through time to find out who would choose to believe Him or not. God decreed exactly who would be given faith in Christ, by naming individuals in Christ, and then giving Christ those very specific people to justify through His life, death, and resurrection.

This is what Paul teaches in Romans 9. First, he addresses the fact that the nation of Israel, as a whole, had been cast away by God, but that the promises that proceeded from Godly election, still stand. These promises are given to the spiritual seed of Abraham; the “children of promise,” which were only a small remnant of Jews (and a few Gentiles) that lived during the O.T. ages. Representative of the elect, children of promise, was Abraham’s son Isaac, and Isaac’s son, Jacob.

When election such as this is revealed and taught, as Paul taught to the churches at Rome and Galatia, there is an opposite truth to be grasped and maintained . . . and that is, if election is limited to only a particular people, then the rest of the people are by definition, non-elect.

The non-elect of this world are represented in the context of Romans 9, by the persons of Esau and Pharaoh.

Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob represent all God’s elect. Esau and Pharaoh represent all the non-elect in the world.

The elect are described as “children of promise,” and “vessels of mercy.”

The non-elect are described as “children of flesh,” and “vessels of wrath.”

What determined God choosing Jacob as elect and Esau as non-elect? Was there any merit in Jacob or any demerit in Esau? Did God have foreknowledge of Jacob’s faith and Esau’s unbelief, and elected one over the other on that basis? No. That is not what Paul teaches at all.

Paul teaches God loved Jacob simply because God willed to love Jacob. Paul teaches God hated Esau simply because God did not will to show Esau mercy and compassion.

God willed to love Jacob, in order to display His grace, and glory. God willed to hate Esau to display His wrath against hard hearts and unbelief.

God elected to save Jacob, according to His will alone, and according to His grace alone. Those elected to receive the gift of grace, and given faith from God to believe in the covenant promises of God.

The non-elect, children of flesh, have no belief in God’s promises, because they have no part in the covenant that provides grace from God. They are left in their unbelief and sins. These are reprobate souls, “prepared for destruction.”

The second major point of AW’s challenge, was that Paul’s teachings in Romans Chapter 9 and Galatians 4:21-31is simply allegory.

Actually, AW uses two terms when presenting this premise. He speaks of analogy as well as allegory. When analogy is employed, there is a similarity taught. So, indeed, there is similarity between the two passages, for both teach about covenant promises being bestowed upon the elect, spiritual seed of Abraham; the children of promise being Isaac, and Jacob. However, this analogy is not allegorical, for these men were actual and historical people. Allegory is mere story-telling that employs fictional characters and fantastical events.

Unfortunately, I observed several inconsistencies in AW’s attempts to make the scriptural accountings of the spiritual seed of Abraham, into nothing more than an allegorical account, (the motive being, I suppose, that election could and should “reconcile” all Israel to each other, rather than working reconciliation between specific sinners and God).

Again I quote AW:


Isaac and Ishmael, like Jacob and Esau, represented two covenants, two nations.

This is incorrect. In the Galatians passage, it is the two mothers, Hagar and Sarah, who are said to symbolize the two covenants:

“For it is written that Abraham had two sons; the one by a bondwoman, the other by a freewoman. But he who was of the bondwoman was born according to the flesh, and he of the free woman through promise, which things are symbolic. For these are the two covenants: The one from Mount Sinai which gives birth to bondage, which is Hagar . . but the Jerusalem above is free, which is the mother of us all . . .now we brethren, as Isaac was are children of promise.” Galatians 4:22-24, 26

Then AW switches from saying the sons are allegory for covenants, and corrects to say the mothers are indeed “figurative” of the covenants:

Paul tells us that these things may be taken figuratively and the women represent two covenants.

When he refers to Sara and Rebekah it is a reference to two covenants

But AW names the wrong mothers! Hagar and Sarah symbolized the covenants, not Rebecca.

I always oppose allegorical interpretation of Scripture, unless the context forces it. If one can claim any literal, historical passage of Scripture to be mere allegory, then what will stop others from writing off Scripture as literal truth, altogether?

This touches upon the Person of Jesus Christ and the gospel itself. Read AW’s following comments very carefully, and see the error and dangers of which I speak:

Reflect on how God uses figurative allegory throughout scripture. First, God promises Abraham his barren century old wife would have a child & she does. Think about how this relates to Christ being incarnated by the Spirit rather than the “flesh” seed of the Davidic line?

Is Scripture mostly allegorical? Is the Genesis account of creation not to be read literally, but accepted as myth? Was the conception of Jesus Christ just allegory, too. As unbelievable as Sarah conceiving in her old age? Was the incarnation of the God/Man also a myth?

Rather than the doctrine of election being a parable or allegory, one will find, by study of the O.T. Law, and the events of history recorded in the Scriptures, that the fulfillment of Godly election results in literal forensics. AW being a lawyer, will understand my point.

Before creation, God elected to save many sinners, by choosing them in Christ. All men had fallen guilty under the Law, for failure to keep God’s laws, and a legally binding sentence of death had been imposed upon all.

But God in His grace, determined to save some from that sentence, while still maintaining His holy Law and perfect justice. A contract (unilateral covenant) was established between Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, agreeing and promising to pardon the sentence imposed upon an elect people, by performing the covenant through the incarnation of the Son. Jesus Christ, came into the world as the sin-bearing substitute, to suffer the full penalty of the Law imposed upon the elect souls given to Him by the Father.

It was only because of the Son’s propitiatory work and full satisfaction of the Law, that God was able to impute Christ’s righteousness to the criminal records of those Christ represented as Advocate on the cross.

“For He made Him who knew no sin to be sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him.” II Cor. 5:21

So the teachings of election and salvation, have to do with existent and actual law and justice, which should not be reduced to mere allegorical stories (or “mechanics”).

Introducing allegory into Romans Chapter 9 cannot stand, and I believe this point of view, even without adding all the previous inconsistencies I have noted, destroys AW’s approach to properly understanding or teaching Romans Chapter 9.

The doctrine of particular, and unconditional election is the subject, context and emphasis of Paul’s teachings, provided by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, to the children of promise in the churches at Rome, Galatia, and Ephesus.

My thanks for AW and TWeb for giving me this opportunity to witness to my Reformed beliefs and to the Holy Word of God.

Nang