Christ died for them not appointed to Wrath.

[brightfame52]

And? How does giving the Greek definition of poieo as being to make= create have any bearing on the discussion?

Thats a reasonable question, because Im showing that God created them that way when He created man male and female Per Matt 19:4 so I clarified it then.

Ah, I see. Now you have gone sideways, and this is where the dispute comes in. First of all you have you have applied a scripture about vessels of honor and dishonor to something it does not apply to. Creation.am and Eve

Why not, that when God first made men at creation, duh

Creation. What you have now asserted in your OP is that God created some already dishonorable by his hand, and some not created dishonorable.

No, God created men already with their destinies purposed. God made man upright, yet God purposed the fall as well. Some in Adam fell to perdition, some fell in mercy. Cain and Abel are from Adam and Eve, yet Abel represented the vessels of mercy, and cain the vessels of wrath. So you actually made a false statement, and said Im guilty of something I never stated, {edit: violation of rule 2.1 and 2.2}

 

[brightfame52]

That is not a point in dispute. The specific point of abuse is you believe God made two distinct types of people, one inherently sinful and always and everywhere destined for wrath, and another group what have/will never experienced any kind of any wrath to any degree at any period of their lives but have, instead experienced only and always mercy. That is incorrect. That is THE point of dispute.

Show where I posted anything about God made man in the beginning inherently evil. God made man upright in the beginning. So Im ignoring the rest of your comments until you show us where I specifically said "is you believe God made two distinct types of people, one inherently sinful"

 

[Arial]

Thats a reasonable question, because Im showing that God created them that way when He created man male and female Per Matt 19:4 so I clarified it then.

The way in which you worded that, you actully just agreed with me when I said you claim God created some as vessels of wrath. If they are vessels of wrath when God created them. then he created them as sinners deserving of wrath.

Why not, that when God first made men at creation, duh

And, you say it again.

No, God created men already with their destinies purposed.

But that is never what you said. God did not determine that an individual's either a vessel of wrath or honor when he created Adam or anyone else. Adam determined that when he sinned. All became vessels of wrath. What he determines is those he will transform into vessels of mercy.
God is indeed creating everyone who is ever born. He brings them into existence through natural means---procreation. But every last one of them is born in Adam, a sinner deserving of his wrath. THAT IS NOT THE SAME THING AS BEING APPOINTED TO WRATH!

God made man upright, yet God purposed the fall as well.

Of course he did or it wouldn't have happened. Do you know why?

Some in Adam fell to perdition, some fell in mercy. Cain and Abel are from Adam and Eve, yet Abel represented the vessels of mercy, and cain the vessels of wrath. So you actually made a false statement, and said Im guilty of something I never stated, {edit: violation of rule 2.1 and 2.2}

There is no such thing as falling in mercy. There is only falling into sin, and sin makes one a vessel of wrath. NOT THE SAME THING AS BEING APPOINTED TO WRATH!

 

[Arial]

Im not here for your class of biblical hermeneutics, I to k some of those classes in Bible College. If you want to lecture me about that, Im not having it. If you want to discuss any statements I made with scripture, Im good, but your offensive remarks about my grammar and hermeneutics you will be ignored, even though a admin said anything about your grammar or hermeneutics

I never said anything about your grammar at all and all I said about hermenetics is what the first rule is and showed where you had not done that with the scripture you were using to support a claim. Did I say anything that wasn't true? Do you have anything to say about what I said that passage was talking about and why and that you had misapplied it because you did not have the correct meaning? Was I right in what I said iow, and if not, what is right? If you respond to a post, as you did, you are required by the rules to address the post in your response, not attack the poster.

 

[brightfame52]

The way in which you worded that, you actully just agreed with me when I said you claim God created some as vessels of wrath. If they are vessels of wrath when God created them. then he created them as sinners deserving of wrath

When He created them their destiny was set.

 

[brightfame52]

I never said anything about your grammar at all and all I said about hermenetics is what the first rule is and showed where you had not done that with the scripture you were using to support a claim. Did I say anything that wasn't true? Do you have anything to say about what I said that passage was talking about and why and that you had misapplied it because you did not have the correct meaning? Was I right in what I said iow, and if not, what is right? If you respond to a post, as you did, you are required by the rules to address the post in your response, not attack the poster.

I'm just telling you, I'm not here for your hermeneutics lecture or grammar class. Now if you want to discuss the theology I bring, fine. Do you have another point l made you want to discuss.

 

[Tambora]

Pagans believed their destiny was set.
Augustine, who was once a pagan, incorporated a lot of pagan philosophy into his theology.

Pagans were very big on fate.
So much so that the Vikings lived their whole life as if it were already determined,
It's one of the reasons they were so vicious, because they believed there was no way for them to lose (or die) unless fate had already determined it, and if it was already determined then there was nothing they could do to change it anyway so they might as well give it their all.

 

[brightfame52]

Some have been appointed to disobedience 1 Pet 2:8

8 And a stone of stumbling, and a rock of offence, even to them which stumble at the word, being disobedient: whereunto also they were appointed.

Disobedience to the Gospel of Christ. Peter writes of them who obey not the Gospel 1 Pet 4:17

For the time is come that judgment must begin at the house of God: and if it first begin at us, what shall the end be of them that obey not the gospel of God?

Paul also Rom 10:16

But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Esaias saith, Lord, who hath believed our report?

2 Thess 1:8

In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ:

These are the ones Christ didn't die for, and God had appointed them to wrath and disobedience.2

 

[Arial]

. Now if you want to discuss the theology I bring, fine. Do you have another point l made you want to discuss.

Great! Here we go.

No, God created men already with their destinies purposed. God made man upright, yet God purposed the fall as well. Some in Adam fell to perdition, some fell in mercy. Cain and Abel are from Adam and Eve, yet Abel represented the vessels of mercy, and cain the vessels of wrath. So you actually made a false statement, and said Im guilty of something I never stated

God did not determine that an individual's either a vessel of wrath or honor when he created Adam or anyone else. Adam determined that when he sinned. All became vessels of wrath. What he determines is those he will transform into vessels of mercy.
God is indeed creating everyone who is ever born. He brings them into existence through natural means---procreation. But every last one of them is born in Adam, a sinner deserving of his wrath. THAT IS NOT THE SAME THING AS BEING APPOINTED TO WRATH!

There is no such thing as falling in mercy. There is only falling into sin, and sin makes one a vessel of wrath. NOT THE SAME THING AS BEING APPOINTED TO WRATH!

Let's start with that and work backwards through the last two pages where I have been trying to discuss your points and have been unable to get you to do so.

 

[Josheb]

No, God created men already with their destinies purposed.

And some of them were destined to experience mercy after having become objects of wrath.

Some in Adam fell to perdition, some fell in mercy.

Do you mean to say some men fell into sin in mercy? Where might I find that stated in scripture and how do you reconcile that with the fact scripture clearly states the wages of sin is death and God's wrath falls upon all who sin?

Cain and Abel are from Adam and Eve, yet Abel represented the vessels of mercy, and cain the vessels of wrath.

Is there scripture that states Cain's eternal disposition?

 

[brightfame52]

Great! Here we go.



Let's start with that and work backwards through the last two pages where I have been trying to discuss your points and have been unable to get you to do so.

So you disagreed.

 

[brightfame52]

And some of them were destined to experience mercy after having become objects of wrath.

They were destined for wrath in the mind and purpose of God b4 the world began. When adam sinned and they in him, God had already determined that some of Adams posterity would be vessels of mercy, and some vessels of wrath for their sins.

 

[Arial]

So you disagreed.

Where is the discussion you said you would provide?

 

[Josheb]

When adam sinned and they in him, God had already determined that some of Adams posterity would be vessels of mercy, and some vessels of wrath for their sins.

That is true but that does not mean God made two different types of people and it does not mean God preemptively determining some would be vessels of mercy did not also mean He had determined they would also have them go through the condition of wrath.

I tried to bring this to your attention much earlier but you've assumed the two conditions are mutually exclusive, that a person destined for mercy CANNOT possibly also go through a period of anything else. They can ONLY be objects of mercy and therefore never be in a state of wrath for even a fraction of a second when that is not the case. God, knowing that everyone would sin, AND knowing that He holds a wrathful view of sin, AND knowing He had also predetermined death would be the consequence for sin, allowed some to go through the experience of sin and death before He made them objects of mercy.

What you've done is like the Christian who quotes God desires all men be saved and imagines that verse defines the totality of God when the fact is God has many co-existing desires. God does desire all men be saved BUT He also desires to mete out the just recompense for sin. These people pit "God is love" against God also being just (and vengeful and conciliatory, and wrathful, etc.). Just because a person is an object of mercy does not mean they were not also subject to the wrath due sin had God not intervened before they sinned. You think all mentions of "created" and made" reference the origin of creation when that is often not the case. Simon was made Peter when Simon was an adult. Yes, God had already foreordained Simon's entire life but that does not change the fact the change was made at a fixed point in Simon's life. The same is true of Paul. Paul was a conspirator to murder and despite vehemently opposing Christ murderously God had already ordained Paul for an entirely different purpose and an entirely different life. He changed Paul in Paul's adulthood, and the change was rather violent (physically, cognitively, emotionally, and spiritually). These same things could be said of most, if not all, of God's people in the Bible. Jacob was a grifter. God broke him (literally and figuratively) and it was due to the breaking and only after being broken that Jacob grasped God's purpose in his life. David was a lying adulterous murder and God dealt with him in decidedly wrathful ways, causing his own sons to rebel against him, killing at least two of his sons, forcing David to confront his own sinfulness to understand God's grace. He made Jonah live inside a great fish for three days.

Your entire position is built on a false dichotomy, and it has proven very difficult for you to examine your own belief objectively. A person can be both an object of wrath and an object of mercy in one lifetime. That is why Paul used the word "formerly." Dispositionally, the saved always were going to get saved BUT they would first become sinners. Dispositionally the saved are always saved but experientially they become sinners first.

 

[brightfame52]

Where is the discussion you said you would provide?

Its coming. You disagreed, all i would do is reestablish what I have already stated. Or do you want me to discard what I worked for and focus my attention on you and your disagreements ?

 

[brightfame52]

That is true but that does not mean God made two different types of people

He made people with two different destinies. They came out of Adam. For instance, I believe cain was destined to be a child of the wicked one and a vessel of wrath, and Abel to be a vessel of mercy.

 

[brightfame52]

And some of them were destined to experience mercy after having become objects of wrath

No, thats in opposition to Rom 9:20-23 which indicates that two distinct group of people were made, vessels of mercy for their sins, and vessels of wrath for their sins. God determined to deal with some of mankind in Mercy for sin, and the other portion in Justice and wrath for their sins

 

[Josheb]

He made people with two different destinies. They came out of Adam.

And Adam was good.

For instance, I believe cain was destined to be a child of the wicked one and a vessel of wrath, and Abel to be a vessel of mercy.

Hmmm.....

Can you provide the verse that definitively states Cain's eternal destiny and explicitly states Cain never turned to God in his exile?

Due to Hebrews 11, we know Abel will be included among those perfected in the Church (Heb. 11:4 & 40). Due to Romans 3-5, we also know Abel was a sinner, a man dead in sin and transgression and, therefore, in need of salvation from sin and wrath even when his sacrifice was accepted and Cain's was not. We also know from the epistolary (verses I have previously provided) that God's response to sin is wrath.


If you believe anything other than the facts of scripture as scripture explicitly states them then your belief needs amending.

 

[Josheb]

No, thats in opposition to Rom 9:20-23 which indicates that two distinct group of people were made, vessels of mercy for their sins, and vessels of wrath for their sins. God determined to deal with some of mankind in Mercy for sin, and the other portion in Justice and wrath for their sins

Romans 9:20-23 does not indicate two distinct people the way you imagine them to be distinct, and it does not preclude the vessels of mercy from previously being vessels of wrath. You read that into the text and that's not what the text actually states. Your entire argument is built on a false dichotomy, and you are not addressing that fact. You're simply repeating yourself. I tried to take the matter up with you one verse at a time and you bailed.

That last part is a fact.

I'm willing to take up the matter again and walk through some of the basic statements of scripture to show you where you're thinking went astray. I'll try to reason with you through the scriptures but, if so, I expect the back and forth to be simple, straightforward, and succinct. No more argumentum ad nauseam, red herrings, ad hominem, tu quoque or any other nonsense. Just answer the questions asked.

And if you do answer the questions asked when asked and keep things simple, I will provide parity.

I will start with the fact everything God made is explicitly stated to have been God and God, therefore, could not possible have made evil people. That statement (Gen. 1:31) radically determines everything else said in scripture about humanity, and if you think it through to its exegetical and logical necessities you can realize where you went off track with scripture.

Think about it. I gotta go and won't be back for several hours.

 

[Arial]

Its coming. You disagreed, all i would do is reestablish what I have already stated. Or do you want me to discard what I worked for and focus my attention on you and your disagreements ?

Here's the thing. You posted something.
I dealt with your post giving points from my pov and interpretation of scripture (with the scripture if you were using a scripture to support your claim).

What we have there is a pov expressed (you).
My counter to the stated claim.

What would be next in you (or anyone) response to my counter should be:
Your counter to my counter, addressing my points, demonstrating from your opinion (opinion is not a bad word or a derogatory one) why what I have said is counter to scripture or my interpretation of that scripture, preferably with other scriptures that also show that my position is incorrect. It could ask for clarification from me or anything else you (or anyone), including follow up questions, have. Anything at all, directly relating to what I claimed in my counter. Or if there are no questions and you see the merit in what I presented from a scriptural basis, (and that is not necessarily agreeing with it) acknowledge that.

My response to that post, should address each point you made or question you asked, either countering with substantive arguments, acknowledging the merits of that post if there are any, or moving the conversation forward by providing more scriptural basis for my position. In both cases the scriptures used need to be more than just a simple quoted scripture, unless doing so will not change the meaning if it is placed back within its context.

And so on and so on. So far, we never get past your first assertion and my counter. The response to my counter is either, a repetition of the first assertion or only one sentence addressed completely out of its context, often with a personal remark having nothing to do with the post. Never is the context addressed.