J
justbyfaith
Guest
'All" means "all" (without exception).You still reject the context of all.
It does not mean every individual ever. It makes a mockery of God's drawing. It makes Him a failure.
'All" means "all" (without exception).You still reject the context of all.
It does not mean every individual ever. It makes a mockery of God's drawing. It makes Him a failure.
Rom 8:29, 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.Nonsense and anti Biblical.
Rom 9:16 So then it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God, who has mercy.
Before they birth.
Rom 9:18 So then he has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills.
Rom 9:19 You will say to me then, “Why does he still find fault? For who can resist his will?”
Rom 9:20 But who are you, O man, to answer back to God? Will what is molded say to its molder, “Why have you made me like this?”
Rom 9:21 Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for dishonorable use?
Rom 9:22 What if God, desiring to show his wrath and to make known his power, has endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction,
Rom 9:23 in order to make known the riches of his glory for vessels of mercy, which he has prepared beforehand for glory—
That was a free will decision that you made.When I was made alive to understanding the gospel by God, my spirit rejoiced and I prayed that His will be done.
Whether you felt responsibility or not, you were responsible, and are still responsible, for any decision you might make concerning receiving or rejecting Christ.I had no personal responsibility!
I was content in my sin. I felt no responsibility at all.
Well, you could if you wanted to, it's your prerogative.Well, I am here to tell you that it may be His will that you are of the non-elect.
Because if some are of the elect and others are of the non-elect, you may be one of them.
Nope.That was a free will decision that you made.
Absolute nonsense.'All" means "all" (without exception).
Again, you ignore context and pick only that which tickles your ears.Rom 8:29, 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.
1Pe 1:2, 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.
Foreknowledge is God knowing before which horse will win the race.
Election is Him betting on the horse that He knows will win.
6 That the Gentiles should be fellowheirs, and of the same body, and partakers of his promise in Christ by the gospel:You're being lazy and not looking up the scripture that I gave you.
Now I have to quote it <sigh>...
Eph 3:6, That the Gentiles should be fellowheirs, and of the same body, and partakers of his promise in Christ by the gospel:
Clearly, in this verse, the Gentiles are beneficiaries of the New Covenant.
I don't know that it doesn't, however Romans 9 seems to indicate God's selectivity. Calvinists, and Arminians have made WHOLE DOCTRINES about it - but that's only "Theology" after all.Agreed, so why does the light not come on for EVERYONE?
Or are you saying it does?
That you know of, anyway. "The light" came to me many times over the span of 10 years or so, and in 1963, I surrendered, repented, and was Born again. Could be the "Seeds" you planted, germinated later, beyond your knowledge.I have spoken to many and I have shared the gospel to many. In my experience, the light (conviction) comes to only some.
But you have no idea of the "Constraints" God is using. Neither does anybody else.It is not because the Power of God fails.
Obviously not, but it took a while to accomplish its purpose. It took 20 years for me.You seem to think that God's drawing Paul failed in it's efficacy?
It does? Let's see some support for that presupposition.'All" means "all" (without exception).
Where does it say you choose to be "made alive"?That was a free will decision that you made.
Fair enough. So, then, you don't mind if I don't look up what you are too lazy (your word, as I remember) to lay out for me.It's alright I'll pass. I don't have a need to know everything that you are trying to communicate to me.
I'll just stay in ignorance on this one.
Ephesians 5:14.Where does it say you choose to be "made alive"?
If I don't lay it out for you, it is not important to me that you look it up.Fair enough. So, then, you don't mind if I don't look up what you are too lazy (your word, as I remember) to lay out for me.
So, those who are fellowheirs, and in the same body as the Jews are not partakers of the Jewish covenant?6 That the Gentiles should be fellowheirs, and of the same body, and partakers of his promise in Christ by the gospel:
Eph. 3:5–6.
I don't know how you study but this is not anywhere close to being a covenant. But I will show the Scripture by which you THINK is covenant but it is not for it lacks any of the language of being a covenant and Paul is describing PROMISES that were given to the House of Israel and one thing needs to be answered is: What is he talking about? What promises?
(OK, two things. Maybe three.)
Your Scripture upon which you believe is a covenant (take note the word 'covenant' is nowhere mentioned and Paul is speaking of "promises.") The question is: What promises is he referring?
That the Gentiles should be fellowheirs, and of the same body, and partakers of his promise in Christ by the gospel:
Eph 3:5–6.
Now, here are a couple of passages in which God is making an actual covenant:
8 And God spake unto Noah, and to his sons with him, saying,
9 And I, behold, I establish my covenant with you, and with your seed after you;
Gen. 9:8–9.
7 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.
Gen. 17:7.
31 Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, That I will make a new covenant With the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:
Jer. 31:31.
These examples above ARE Covenants.
Your passage in Ephesians falls short of being a covenant for first, Paul is writing to Jewish Christians about promises and it is void of any covenant language; second, Paul is talking about promises and doesn't state what promises; and in a closer examination of your responses, you refuse to even consider the covenant God makes with the House of Israel in in Jeremiah 31 in which NO GENTILES are mentioned. You prefer to call Paul's discussion of promises - but he doesn't identify which promises - as being a covenant but it isn't.
Before you or anyone seek to establish any Second Testament reality it is extremely important to first establish First Testament precedent. In other words, the whole of the Hebrew/Jewish Scriptures falls into three parts: the Law, the Psalms, and the Prophets.
These are the Hebrew/Jewish Scriptures.
The writings of Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Paul, Peter, James, Jude, are writings that for the most part discuss the Hebrew/Jewish Scriptures to Hebrew/Jewish readers.
We can readily see that the book of Hebrews was addressed to a Jewish audience, as is the letter of James "to the twelve tribes scattered", for there is extensive discussion about Jewish history, the Abrahamic and Mosaic Covenants, the OT prophets and their prophecies, the Judaic religion and practices as well as their culture, the Promises of God and other mainly Jewish issues that are at a level of knowledge that Gentiles living at the time of their writing would just not have the level of knowledge to understand them. In other words, Paul, a Jewish Christian and former Pharisee from the tribe of Benjamin writes to Jewish Christians in churches founded in Gentile lands by Jewish Christians about issues concerning the Law, the Psalms, and the Prophets to readers who are deeply versed in these particular subjects apart from Gentiles who were still in the first century carried away by their dumb idols.
While the Temple still stood the "ism" of Judaism remained and the events and phenomenon occurring first in Jerusalem at the time of the Feasts of Harvests (Acts 2) were things and events that were viewed through the prism of the First Covenant Hebrew/Jewish Scriptures. Being a New Covenant that God was now establishing with the House of Israel including the advent of the Promised Holy Spirit they were completely within their rights to understand everything that was happening to them as a Covenant Nation with YHWH as Hebrew/Jewish events and histories concerning Israel.
Gentiles were NOT part of the equation. Everything was Israel. And one thing Israel as a nation had to understand in this "New Thing" God was doing was to ascertain exactly what effect Israel's Messiah would have and was having upon this people and their Abrahamic and Mosaic Covenants.
The fact of the matter is with regard to Redemptive history is that God made Covenant with Abraham and the children of Israel.
God has made no covenant with Gentiles.
THIS IS the truth of the matter.
“This sleepiness in the Christian is exceedingly dangerous, too, because he can do a great deal while he is asleep that will make him look as if he were quite awake.” (C. Spurgeon)Ephesians 5:14