Announcement

Collapse

Theology 201 Guidelines

This is the forum to discuss the spectrum of views within Christianity on God's foreknowledge and election such as Calvinism, Arminianism, Molinism, Open Theism, Process Theism, Restrictivism, and Inclusivism, Christian Universalism and what these all are about anyway. Who is saved and when is/was their salvation certain? How does God exercise His sovereignty and how powerful is He? Is God timeless and immutable? Does a triune God help better understand God's love for mankind?

While this area is for the discussion of these doctrines within historic Christianity, all theists interested in discussing these areas within the presuppositions of and respect for the Christian framework are welcome to participate here. This is not the area for debate between nontheists and theists, additionally, there may be some topics that within the Moderator's discretion fall so outside the bounds of mainstream evangelical doctrine that may be more appropriately placed within Comparative Religions 101 Nontheists seeking only theistic participation only in a manner that does not seek to undermine the faith of others are also welcome - but we ask that Moderator approval be obtained beforehand.

Atheists are welcome to discuss and debate these issues in the Apologetics 301 or General Theistics 101 forum without such restrictions. Theists who wish to discuss these issues outside the parameters of orthodox Christian doctrine are invited to Unorthodox Theology 201.

Remember, our forum rules apply here as well. If you haven't read them now would be a good time.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Most difficult Scripture?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post

    I am saddened that you find comfort in the deception that we do not have a part in the introduction of lost people to Jesus. The JOY we get from leading somebody to Christ is almost like getting saved all over again!
    1 Corinthians 3:6 acknowledges that people play roles in bringing people to Jesus, while not neglecting to mention that it's ultimately God that does the work. I don't think anybody would ever get the idea that it's otherwise without different theological concepts forcing them to view it a different way, but that's what happens.
    "I am not angered that the Moral Majority boys campaign against abortion. I am angry when the same men who say, "Save OUR children" bellow "Build more and bigger bombers." That's right! Blast the children in other nations into eternity, or limbless misery as they lay crippled from "OUR" bombers! This does not jell." - Leonard Ravenhill

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Esther View Post
      I am applying this scripture specifically to the persevering part. For example, there are many I have prayed for for years to be saved after sharing the Gospel with them in various ways. These verses free me from continuing to persevere.
      Why? Scripture is replete with examples and admonishments to persevere.

      For me, I find it a mistake to assume I'm going to see the fruition of every prayer. Thing is, we don't always (or even often) know which role we are playing. Am I the plowman, or the reaper? (Or my case, the ox or the donkey ) Did I sow the seed or just bust up some dirt? Even if I'm helping with the harvest, I may not see that particular stalk come in to the barn.

      It's harder on the analogy, but I think we're the tools the Holy Spirit chooses to employ - or not. He alone knows whether it's time for the plowshare or the scythe. My job is to just hack at whatever He's aiming for - and let Him do the real work where only He can.
      "He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose." - Jim Elliot

      "Forgiveness is the way of love." Gary Chapman

      My Personal Blog

      My Novella blog (Current Novella Begins on 7/25/14)

      Quill Sword

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by KingsGambit View Post
        1 Corinthians 3:6 acknowledges that people play roles in bringing people to Jesus, while not neglecting to mention that it's ultimately God that does the work. I don't think anybody would ever get the idea that it's otherwise without different theological concepts forcing them to view it a different way, but that's what happens.
        And there's no promise that the person we are praying for to receive Salvation will ever actually receive Salvation, or they COULD, but we might never know it til we see them in Glory.

        One of the real blessings of Facebook (yes, it has its good points) is when somebody from my ministry nearly FIFTY YEARS AGO hunts me down on Facebook to tell me they're now living for Jesus, and a Pastor or Missionary, or otherwise serving the Lord or living the Christian life.

        Fact is, we're told to be witnesses, so we should do it faithfully whether we think it works or not.
        The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by lee_merrill View Post
          Yet OT people were saved in the same way we are, by faith, Abraham is the very example of salvation by faith in the New Covenant.

          And I note again the passive (on our part) analogies of salvation in Scripture, why would Jesus say "You must be born again" if he was speaking of ultimately, a free choice on Nicodemus' part? Yes, we have a choice to make in salvation, but behind that choice is the choice of God.
          In terms of just the wording of the English translations, this is surely an "eye of the beholder" situation. My eye sees the Nicodemus dialogue much differently. To me, your view turns it into the cruelest of taunts: "You must be born from above to enter Heaven. Will you, Nicodemus, be one of the ones God chooses to beget? Maybe, maybe not. Sucks to be you if you're not, but it's out of your hands."

          Going beyond just the wording of the English translations, there is the matter of the cultural background, in which the concept of becoming "as newborn children" was already tied to the ritual baptism applied to converts to Judaism. I usually copy and paste several paragraphs from my IVP Bible Background Commentary, but this time I'll just link here.

          FTR, I have the same perspective on John 1. The "It's all God" side emphasizes v. 13, and especially the "human decision" or "will of man" portions of most translations, especially the more "literal" ones; that side also, IMO, distorts v. 12, claiming it refers to something separate from v. 13. The synergist side emphasizes v. 12, seeing that we "believe" and "receive" BEFORE we "become (His) children" (= are "born of God").
          Geislerminian Antinomian Kenotic Charispneumaticostal Gender Mutualist-Egalitarian.

          Beige Federalist.

          Nationalist Christian.

          "Everybody is somebody's heretic."

          Social Justice is usually the opposite of actual justice.

          Proud member of the this space left blank community.

          Would-be Grand Vizier of the Padishah Maxi-Super-Ultra-Hyper-Mega-MAGA King Trumpius Rex.

          Justice for Ashli Babbitt!

          Justice for Matthew Perna!

          Arrest Ray Epps and his Fed bosses!

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by lee_merrill View Post
            P.S. Though I would say to Esther that we need not give up praying for people, God works through our prayers to carry out his will.
            Thank you for input. It would be good if you could please provide me with scriptural references that support that God works through our prayers to carry out His will. Specifically with regards to the salvation of others. I am at a place where no matter what my effort or lack thereof, God's Will will ultimately be done and this gives me a strange peace.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Teallaura View Post
              Why? Scripture is replete with examples and admonishments to persevere.

              For me, I find it a mistake to assume I'm going to see the fruition of every prayer. Thing is, we don't always (or even often) know which role we are playing. Am I the plowman, or the reaper? (Or my case, the ox or the donkey ) Did I sow the seed or just bust up some dirt? Even if I'm helping with the harvest, I may not see that particular stalk come in to the barn.

              It's harder on the analogy, but I think we're the tools the Holy Spirit chooses to employ - or not. He alone knows whether it's time for the plowshare or the scythe. My job is to just hack at whatever He's aiming for - and let Him do the real work where only He can.
              Thank you a very interesting perspective.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                And there's no promise that the person we are praying for to receive Salvation will ever actually receive Salvation, or they COULD, but we might never know it til we see them in Glory.

                Fact is, we're told to be witnesses, so we should do it faithfully whether we think it works or not.
                Thank you this gives me pause for thought.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by KingsGambit View Post
                  1 Corinthians 3:6 acknowledges that people play roles in bringing people to Jesus, while not neglecting to mention that it's ultimately God that does the work. I don't think anybody would ever get the idea that it's otherwise without different theological concepts forcing them to view it a different way, but that's what happens.
                  Thank you this is very nicely put.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                    Correct, but the NT faith requires a confession that Jesus is the Christ.
                    Agreed!

                    "Ye must be born again" is the condition by which one is saved. He was not ordering Nicodemus to be born again, He was passionately making it plain that it was a requirement for Salvation.
                    Yes, but the analogy is passive on Nicodemus' part, thus the question "how can this be?"

                    Originally posted by Teallaura
                    … but that God has chosen all who will accept salvation (in line with His will that all be saved) - not a deterministic pre-selection.
                    But this doesn't fit passive analogies, where the person is completely passive in salvation.

                    Originally posted by NorinRadd
                    To me, your view turns it into the cruelest of taunts: "You must be born from above to enter Heaven. Will you, Nicodemus, be one of the ones God chooses to beget? Maybe, maybe not. Sucks to be you if you're not, but it's out of your hands."
                    God in his mercy chooses people for salvation, this is not a taunt--and I believe Scripture give us reason to believe that God will choose everyone.

                    "For God has bound everyone over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all." (Ro 11:32)

                    I have the same perspective on John 1. The "It's all God" side emphasizes v. 13, and especially the "human decision" or "will of man" portions of most translations, especially the more "literal" ones; that side also, IMO, distorts v. 12, claiming it refers to something separate from v. 13. The synergist side emphasizes v. 12, seeing that we "believe" and "receive" BEFORE we "become (His) children" (= are "born of God").
                    Well, we receive before we become God's children, but I believe this reception is more acknowledgement of Jesus, not a saving belief in him. We do not believe before becoming God's children, according to John, and indeed, salvation is "not from human decision", as Paul concurs.

                    For he says to Moses,

                    "'I will have mercy on whom I have mercy [note: not on those whom I see will receive my mercy], and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.' It does not, therefore, depend on human desire or effort, but on God’s mercy." (Ro 9:15–16)

                    Blessings,
                    Lee
                    "What I pray of you is, to keep your eye upon Him, for that is everything. Do you say, 'How am I to keep my eye on Him?' I reply, keep your eye off everything else, and you will soon see Him. All depends on the eye of faith being kept on Him. How simple it is!" (J.B. Stoney)

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Esther View Post
                      Thank you for input. It would be good if you could please provide me with scriptural references that support that God works through our prayers to carry out His will. Specifically with regards to the salvation of others. I am at a place where no matter what my effort or lack thereof, God's Will will ultimately be done and this gives me a strange peace.
                      "Brothers and sisters, my heart’s desire and prayer to God for the Israelites is that they may be saved." (Ro 10:1)

                      This is Paul praying for those whom he had just said God had not chosen! So we should pray for all people (see 1 Tim. 2:1-2), with confidence that God is listening, and thus our prayers are part of his plan, since he knows what we will pray.

                      "For we are co-workers in God’s service..." (1 Co 3:9)

                      Blessings,
                      Lee
                      "What I pray of you is, to keep your eye upon Him, for that is everything. Do you say, 'How am I to keep my eye on Him?' I reply, keep your eye off everything else, and you will soon see Him. All depends on the eye of faith being kept on Him. How simple it is!" (J.B. Stoney)

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by lee_merrill View Post
                        "Brothers and sisters, my heart’s desire and prayer to God for the Israelites is that they may be saved." (Ro 10:1)

                        This is Paul praying for those whom he had just said God had not chosen! So we should pray for all people (see 1 Tim. 2:1-2), with confidence that God is listening, and thus our prayers are part of his plan, since he knows what we will pray.

                        "For we are co-workers in God’s service..." (1 Co 3:9)

                        Blessings,
                        Lee
                        Very good thank you.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by lee_merrill View Post
                          "For God has bound everyone over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all." (Ro 11:32)
                          This is the best scripture as a response to God's mercy. Clearly on all then.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by lee_merrill View Post
                            ...

                            Yes, but the analogy is passive on Nicodemus' part, thus the question "how can this be?"...
                            You didn't bother to look at the link I posted, did you?

                            God in his mercy chooses people for salvation, this is not a taunt--and I believe Scripture give us reason to believe that God will choose everyone.

                            "For God has bound everyone over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all." (Ro 11:32)
                            That's a nice thought. What do we do about the many passages that teach that some will be consigned to everlasting torment and destruction?

                            And yes, of course I know YOU don't see it as a taunt. But *I* am really not able to see it any other way, if indeed Nicodemus is entirely "passive" in the matter.

                            Well, we receive before we become God's children, but I believe this reception is more acknowledgement of Jesus, not a saving belief in him. We do not believe before becoming God's children, according to John, and indeed, salvation is "not from human decision", as Paul concurs.
                            Yes, I already acknowledged that monergists see John 1 that way, and I am unable to do so. In my eyes, that requires a dishonest reading of v. 12. And I suspect that in your eyes, my view requires a dishonest reading of v. 13. (I see v. 13 as talking about who takes the initiative, not about unilateral action.)

                            For he says to Moses,

                            "'I will have mercy on whom I have mercy [note: not on those whom I see will receive my mercy], and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.' It does not, therefore, depend on human desire or effort, but on God’s mercy." (Ro 9:15–16)

                            Blessings,
                            Lee
                            Here I will quote at some length Keener's notes from the IVP Bible Background Commentary:

                            ---------------------------

                            9:14–15. In Exodus 33:19, God has the right to choose whom he wills. In the context, he has forgiven Israel as a whole because Moses has found favor in his sight (33:12–17), and God would show Moses his glory (33:18–23) because Moses is his friend (33:11). God’s choice of individuals, however, was not arbitrary but was based on people’s response to God (32:32–34), although God had initially called both Israel and Moses unconditionally.

                            9:16–18. God raised up this particular Pharaoh for the purpose of showing his power, that “the Egyptians may know that I am the Lord,” as Exodus repeatedly says (e.g., 9:16). God clearly hardened Pharaoh’s heart (Ex 9:12, 35; 10:27; 11:10), but not until Pharaoh had hardened his own several times (Ex 7:22; 8:15, 32). In other words, God elevated a particular person to fight against him; but that person also made his own choice, which God foreknew, before God punished him with a continuously hard heart (cf. Rom 1:24–25; 2 Thess 2:10–12). The Old Testament affirms both God’s sovereignty (e.g., Deut 29:4) and human responsibility (e.g., Deut 5:29), assuming that God is sovereign enough to ensure both (although human choice could not nullify God’s word; cf., e.g., 1 Kings 22:26–30, 34–35).

                            9:19–21. Paul here uses the language of Isaiah 29:16, 45:9 and 64:8, which the Dead Sea Scrolls often used in prayers. The point is that God made people, and God can therefore do with them as he wills. In the context this means that he can choose either Jews or Gentiles, not that his predestination is arbitrary.

                            Some nineteenth-century churchgoers reasoned that God would save them if he chose and hence made no effort to seek salvation. Their view misrepresented the point of this passage. Although Paul teaches “ predestination,” we must understand what he means by that term in the light of what it meant in his own day, not what it has meant in recent centuries’ theology (or, as in the case just mentioned, in distortions of that theology).
                            Most Jewish people believed that their people as a whole had been chosen for salvation; they viewed predestination in corporate, ethnic terms. Paul here discusses predestination only in the context of the salvation of Israel (9:1–13) and the Gentiles (9:23–29); thus he means only what both context and culture suggest: God can sovereignly choose to elect whom he wills, and that need not be on the basis of descent from Abraham. God’s sovereignty means that he is free to choose on another basis than his covenant with ethnic Israel (3:1–8); he can choose on the basis of (foreknown) faith in Christ (4:11–13; 8:29–30).

                            Some older New Testament scholars, like Rudolf Bultmann, thought that Romans 9–11 had nothing to do with the argument of the letter; but these scholars misunderstood Romans. In this letter Paul puts Jews and Gentiles on the same spiritual footing (see the introduction), and Romans 9–11 is in fact the climax of his argument.

                            ---------------------

                            I do agree that prima facie the passage does suggest God just "picking" people for salvation, like petals (no Calvinistic pun intended) from a daisy: "I love you, I love you not, I love you, I love you not..." I'm honestly not sure how much of that is because of the text itself, and how much is because of the Reformation dogma permeating hermeneutical analyses that we (collectively) have encountered and absorbed over the years. Consideration of the context of the book, and of the OT context of each of the quotes, challenges that view.
                            Last edited by NorrinRadd; 09-02-2019, 06:43 PM.
                            Geislerminian Antinomian Kenotic Charispneumaticostal Gender Mutualist-Egalitarian.

                            Beige Federalist.

                            Nationalist Christian.

                            "Everybody is somebody's heretic."

                            Social Justice is usually the opposite of actual justice.

                            Proud member of the this space left blank community.

                            Would-be Grand Vizier of the Padishah Maxi-Super-Ultra-Hyper-Mega-MAGA King Trumpius Rex.

                            Justice for Ashli Babbitt!

                            Justice for Matthew Perna!

                            Arrest Ray Epps and his Fed bosses!

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by NorrinRadd View Post
                              You didn't bother to look at the link I posted, did you?
                              Well, arguing by link is taboo. But I find Keener's belief that people are born again after believing to be unscriptural, regeneration has to precede faith.

                              What do we do about the many passages that teach that some will be consigned to everlasting torment and destruction?
                              We teach them too, and let God sort out what will happen and when, I believe eternity will be unlike anyone expects--as in the cross, which no one predicted.

                              And yes, of course I know YOU don't see it as a taunt. But *I* am really not able to see it any other way, if indeed Nicodemus is entirely "passive" in the matter.
                              But the question at hand is whether salvation is passive, not whether this is a taunt. How is life from the dead not passive, how is being born not passive, how is a new creation not passive on our part?

                              I see v. 13 as talking about who takes the initiative, not about unilateral action.
                              And I see "not of human decision" as saying our decision is secondary, dependent on God's decision.

                              "He chose to give us birth through the word of truth, that we might be a kind of firstfruits of all he created." (Jas 1:18)

                              Source: BBC

                              God’s choice of individuals, however, was not arbitrary but was based on people’s response to God (32:32–34)…

                              © Copyright Original Source


                              I don't think this fits with anyone's theology, people start out in the book, and are blotted out when they sin egregiously? Or if they do not overcome (Rev. 3:5)? But I think God's choice is primary here, too:

                              "All who dwell on the earth will worship him, everyone whose name has not been written from the foundation of the world in the book of life of the Lamb who has been slain." (Re 13:8)

                              Source: BBC

                              The Old Testament affirms both God’s sovereignty (e.g., Deut 29:4) and human responsibility (e.g., Deut 5:29), assuming that God is sovereign enough to ensure both …

                              © Copyright Original Source


                              "Yet to this day the LORD has not given you a heart to know, nor eyes to see, nor ears to hear." (Dt. 29:4)

                              God's choice in salvation.

                              "Oh that they had such a heart in them, that they would fear Me and keep all My commandments always, that it may be well with them and with their sons forever!" (Dt. 5:29)

                              God's desire for their salvation, not such a good text for human responsibility.

                              Source: BBC

                              9:19–21. … In the context this means that he can choose either Jews or Gentiles, not that his predestination is arbitrary.

                              © Copyright Original Source


                              Well, predestination is certainly not arbitrary, but this is not about choosing Jews or Gentiles:

                              "You will say to me then, 'Why does He still find fault? For who resists His will?' On the contrary, who are you, O man, who answers back to God? The thing molded will not say to the molder, 'Why did you make me like this,' will it? Or does not the potter have a right over the clay, to make from the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for common use?" (Ro 9:19–21)

                              "One vessel" clearly refers to an individual. And Paul clearly implies that no one resists God's will, God's choice here in salvation.

                              Source: BBC

                              God’s sovereignty means that he is free to choose on another basis than his covenant with ethnic Israel (3:1–8); he can choose on the basis of (foreknown) faith in Christ (4:11–13; 8:29–30).

                              © Copyright Original Source


                              But where is foreknown faith in Scripture?

                              Blessings,
                              Lee
                              "What I pray of you is, to keep your eye upon Him, for that is everything. Do you say, 'How am I to keep my eye on Him?' I reply, keep your eye off everything else, and you will soon see Him. All depends on the eye of faith being kept on Him. How simple it is!" (J.B. Stoney)

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by lee_merrill View Post
                                Well, arguing by link is taboo.
                                That's an asinine reason to ignore it. I summarized it, and it was clear enough for any non-ass to recognize I did it to save space, rather than follow my usual practice of copying and pasting multiple paragraphs of notes from two or three different passages of Scripture.

                                Since you seem to prefer it, here are those notes:

                                -----------------------------------------------
                                --------------------- John 3 -------------------

                                3:1–8
                                Conversion as Birth from Above

                                Jesus explains to Nicodemus that religious knowledge and ethnicity are not a sufficient basis for a relationship with God; one must be born into his family by the Spirit. John often contrasts water rituals and the Spirit (3:5; see comment on 4:7–26).

                                3:1. A wealthy and prominent Nicodemus is known in Jerusalem in this period, though we cannot be sure that John means the same one. As a highly educated “ruler” or leader in the Jewish community, John’s Nicodemus was surely well-to-do.

                                3:2. One might come by night to avoid being seen, or because Jewish teachers who worked during the day could study only at night (cf. Ps 119:148; the latter was undoubtedly not the case with Nicodemus, who would not need to work—v. 1). But John includes the detail because it serves the theme of light and darkness (11:10; 13:30) that brackets this narrative (3:19–21).

                                3:3–4. Jesus speaks literally of being born “from above,” which means “from God” (“above” was a Jewish circumlocution, or roundabout expression, for God). One could also construe the phrase as meaning “reborn,” which Nicodemus takes literally. (Ancient writers, including those of the Old Testament— Jer 1:11–12; Mic 1:10–15 —often used plays on words, and John includes quite a few other puns; they also sometimes used other characters as less intelligent foils for a narrative’s main spokesperson.) Because Jewish teachers spoke of Gentile converts to Judaism as starting life anew like “newborn children” (just as adopted sons under Roman law relinquished all legal status in their former family when they became part of a new one), Nicodemus should have understood that Jesus meant conversion; but it never occurs to him that someone Jewish would need to convert to the true faith of Israel.

                                3:5. Converts to Judaism were said to become “as newborn children” when they were baptized to remove Gentile impurity. “Born of water” thus clarifies for Nicodemus that “born from above” means conversion, not a second physical birth.

                                The Greek wording of 3:5 can mean either “water and the Spirit ” or “water, that is, the Spirit.” Ezekiel 36:24–27 used water symbolically for the cleansing of the Spirit (cf. especially the Dead Sea Scrolls), so here Jesus could mean “converted by the Spirit” (cf. 7:37–39)—a spiritual proselyte baptism. Whereas Jewish teachers generally spoke of converts to Judaism as “newborn” only in the sense that they were legally severed from old relationships, an actual rebirth by the Spirit would produce a new heart (Ezek 36:26).

                                3:6–7. The “spirit” that is born from God’s Spirit may reflect the “new spirit” of Ezekiel 36:26.

                                3:8. One could also translate “sound of the wind” as “voice of the Spirit” (for plays on words, see comment on 3:3–4). The wind is unpredictable and uncontrollable (see Eccles 8:8; cf. Eccles 1:6, 8, 14, 17; 2:11, 17, 26; 4:4, 6, 16; 6:9). The Spirit was symbolized as wind in Ezekiel 37, which some Jewish interpreters linked with Genesis 2:7 (cf. Jn 20:22).

                                ------------------ End Keener's John 3 Comments -------------

                                ------------------- Begin Keener's Mark 1 Comments -----------

                                1:4–5. Like many other ancient peoples, Jewish people practiced ceremonial washings. Their only once-for-all ceremonial washing, however, was the immersion that non-Jews had to go through when they converted to Judaism. Non-Jews who were converting to Judaism would immerse themselves in water, probably under the supervision of a religious expert. John’s baptizing activity fits this model.

                                Jewish people also practiced “repentance” when they did something wrong, asking God’s forgiveness and determining to change. (The Old Testament prophets often used this Hebrew idea of “turning” from sin; it involves more than just a “change of mind,” which is the literal sense of the Greek term used here.) But the ultimate example of repenting, or turning from a wrong way of living to a right way of living, was when a non-Jew decided to obey the teachings of Israel’s God.

                                To tell Jewish people that they had to be baptized or repent the same way non-Jews did would have been offensive, because it challenged the prevalent Jewish belief about salvation. Most Jewish people thought that if they were born into a Jewish family and did not reject God’s law, they would be saved; John told them instead that they had to come to God the same way that non-Jews did. The point of John’s baptism is that everyone has to come to God on the same terms.

                                The Jordan River was the most natural place for John to have the people immerse themselves, but this location may have also evoked Israel’s history of salvation (Josh 3–4). John’s coming in the “wilderness” could evoke Israel’s history, too, especially because Isaiah 40:3 predicted the herald of a new exodus there, and many Jewish people expected the Messiah to come as a new Moses there.
                                ---------------------


                                But I find Keener's belief that people are born again after believing to be unscriptural, regeneration has to precede faith.
                                This is a theological presupposition not automatically evident in Scripture itself. IOW, *I* find *your* (and Calvinists' and other "RPF" adherents') belief to be "unscriptural."

                                We teach them too, and let God sort out what will happen and when, I believe eternity will be unlike anyone expects--as in the cross, which no one predicted.
                                So everyone will be saved except those that aren't. And everyone will be damned except those that aren't. And who knows what will happen to the other 100%.

                                But the question at hand is whether salvation is passive, not whether this is a taunt.
                                Right. If it's a taunt, that goes to the character of God, and whether He is even worthy of worship, but that's a separate topic.

                                How is life from the dead not passive, how is being born not passive, how is a new creation not passive on our part?
                                Because receiving life (= being reborn) is conditional on our choosing to believe and receive, or at the very least on our choosing to not resist. For us, being reborn means much *more* than it did to the original audience (meaning those thinking in terms of Jewish proselyte baptism), but it's unlikely it means something *contrary*. For them, becoming as newborn children *followed* the choice to convert and be baptized in water, and was metaphorical (and to some extent legal); for us, it *follows* believing and receiving, and being baptized in the Spirit, and is literal (but not physical).


                                And I see "not of human decision" as saying our decision is secondary, dependent on God's decision.

                                "He chose to give us birth through the word of truth, that we might be a kind of firstfruits of all he created." (Jas 1:18)
                                Or in Peter's words, we "have been born anew, not from perishable but from imperishable seed, through the living and enduring word of God." But this does not just "happen." We "begin with the Spirit" when we "receive the Spirit," which is the result of "believing what [we] heard" -- Gal. 3:2-3. We are saved through faith (Eph. 2, inter alia), and faith comes from hearing the word of Christ (Rom. 10:17). We hear, we trust (or do not), we are born again (or are not).

                                Source: BBC

                                God’s choice of individuals, however, was not arbitrary but was based on people’s response to God (32:32–34)…

                                © Copyright Original Source


                                I don't think this fits with anyone's theology, people start out in the book, and are blotted out when they sin egregiously? Or if they do not overcome (Rev. 3:5)? But I think God's choice is primary here, too:

                                "All who dwell on the earth will worship him, everyone whose name has not been written from the foundation of the world in the book of life of the Lamb who has been slain." (Re 13:8)
                                That Rev. citation doesn't show "choice" any more than it shows foreknowledge.

                                As for the first part of your comment, how do you figure it doesn't "fit with anyone's theology"? Many of us believe it is possible to apostatize. Someone who did so would be in the Book of Life, and then erased. Conceptually, Rev. 3:5 does not sound too unlike Matt. 10:32-33.

                                Source: BBC

                                The Old Testament affirms both God’s sovereignty (e.g., Deut 29:4) and human responsibility (e.g., Deut 5:29), assuming that God is sovereign enough to ensure both …

                                © Copyright Original Source


                                "Yet to this day the LORD has not given you a heart to know, nor eyes to see, nor ears to hear." (Dt. 29:4)

                                God's choice in salvation.

                                "Oh that they had such a heart in them, that they would fear Me and keep all My commandments always, that it may be well with them and with their sons forever!" (Dt. 5:29)

                                God's desire for their salvation, not such a good text for human responsibility.
                                If you have shown anything, it is tension (read: inconsistency) in Scripture, within a single book. In ch. 5, as quoted by Moses, I AM is wishing that His people would have proper hearts, and the tone of His words is that He is uncertain it will be so. In ch. 29, Moses is placing the ability to assure proper hearts clearly in the power of I AM.


                                Source: BBC

                                9:19–21. … In the context this means that he can choose either Jews or Gentiles, not that his predestination is arbitrary.

                                © Copyright Original Source


                                Well, predestination is certainly not arbitrary, ...
                                I understand that monergists do not believe it is arbitrary. Many of us are unable to perceive your view as anything BUT arbitrary.


                                ...but this is not about choosing Jews or Gentiles:

                                "You will say to me then, 'Why does He still find fault? For who resists His will?' On the contrary, who are you, O man, who answers back to God? The thing molded will not say to the molder, 'Why did you make me like this,' will it? Or does not the potter have a right over the clay, to make from the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for common use?" (Ro 9:19–21)

                                "One vessel" clearly refers to an individual. And Paul clearly implies that no one resists God's will, God's choice here in salvation.
                                "One vessel" is an illustration, a metaphor. And pressing too far on the "no one resists His will," IMO, invites the idea that God Himself is the ultimate author of evil.

                                Source: BBC

                                God’s sovereignty means that he is free to choose on another basis than his covenant with ethnic Israel (3:1–8); he can choose on the basis of (foreknown) faith in Christ (4:11–13; 8:29–30).

                                © Copyright Original Source


                                But where is foreknown faith in Scripture?
                                If you mean where is it *explicitly* taught, the answer is, "The same place as 'regeneration precedes faith,'" i.e nowhere.

                                You excised the portion where Keener explained that the recipients of the letter understood election in corporate terms. Jews believed they were chosen automatically by virtue of ethnic descent from Abraham. Paul is saying people are chosen because of being (not "to be") in Christ; and of course the only way to be "in Christ" is by faith.
                                Geislerminian Antinomian Kenotic Charispneumaticostal Gender Mutualist-Egalitarian.

                                Beige Federalist.

                                Nationalist Christian.

                                "Everybody is somebody's heretic."

                                Social Justice is usually the opposite of actual justice.

                                Proud member of the this space left blank community.

                                Would-be Grand Vizier of the Padishah Maxi-Super-Ultra-Hyper-Mega-MAGA King Trumpius Rex.

                                Justice for Ashli Babbitt!

                                Justice for Matthew Perna!

                                Arrest Ray Epps and his Fed bosses!

                                Comment

                                widgetinstance 221 (Related Threads) skipped due to lack of content & hide_module_if_empty option.
                                Working...
                                X