Christ died for them not appointed to Wrath.

[Arial]

Because it says Before of old. If it would have just said of old, that's pretty old, but to add Before of old, thats timeless.

The KJV is the only version that translates it "before of old" and it does so because that was the type of vocabulary used at the time. But even so, it does not mean timeless. It means in time past. Nothing there indicates that it was at creation. When in time past is not stated, but because of the things I said in the post you are responding to but did not address, only repeated yourself, it cannot mean at creation can it? Everything was very good as God created it.

I agree that in time past (before Jude wrote that), those people infiltrating the church that Jude is writing about were ordained to condemnation. But that is not the issue. The issue is your claim that God created at creation some for condemnation and some for mercy. It was his decree that all would fall into condemnation through Adam, he ordained the means of that, and that some would receive mercy. They had to all be under condemnation in order for any to receive mercy. You keep ignoring that, never ever addressing it, and simply begin posting scriptures that say some are condemned and some receive mercy.

NO ONE DISAGREES WITH THAT!

You make a claim that pertains to before the fall and then change the subject to only showing scriptures that say some are condemned and some are shown mercy, something that applies only to after the fall, and treat all other posters as if they deny what they agree with and have said they agree with it. Frankly, it is an egregious way of posting. You have yet to even actually address your original claim that creation is when God created both good and evil people. It is as though you cannot distinguish between the eternity of God, and the plan of redemption that takes place in the boundaries of time.

If you respond, please address what I have said. Don't just repeat doing the same thing I just described.

 

[brightfame52]

Then it is NOT about anyone else,

That shows you that some were destined to disobedience. Even though Rom 10 is about jews, its true of some gentiles as well. Just like both jew and gentile were made vessels of mercy Rom 9:22-24

22 What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction:

23 And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory,

24 Even us, whom he hath called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?

So there, why would you think some gentiles are excluded from being vessels of wrath , when they arent excluded from being vessels of mercy.

You have jews destined to disobedience 1 Pet 2:8 and Gentiles. What you think to all them gentiles God left them to themselves for centuries, not sending them any knowedge of Himself or Christ ?

Now Christ didnt die for them appointed to wrath, but them appointed to eternal life through Him

 

[brightfame52]

The KJV is the only version that translates it "before of old"

That's enough, so does the

Also the AKJV

For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ.

Besides that, it was way b4 they were born, so when they were born, their condemnation was sealed. Also see the comments by John Gill, we agree

 

[brightfame52]

You make a claim that pertains to before the fall a

I believe all of Gods eternal purposes were decided b4 the fall. I think b4 the fall, before Adam was created, God had already purposed Christ to redeem the elect from sin 1 Pet 1:20

20 Who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you,

Adam was finally created in Gen 1 his sin was predetermined by God, and also the fate of all his posterity

 

[Arial]

I believe all of Gods eternal purposes were decided b4 the fall. I think b4 the fall, before Adam was created, God had already purposed Christ to redeem the elect from sin 1 Pet 1:20

20 Who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you,

Adam was finally created in Gen 1 his sin was predetermined by God, and also the fate of all his posterity

There is no dispute with that!! That is not the issue!!! Address the posts!!!!!!!!!!!

You make a claim that pertains to before the fall and then change the subject to only showing scriptures that say some are condemned and some are shown mercy, something that applies only to after the fall, and treat all other posters as if they deny what they agree with and have said they agree with it. Frankly, it is an egregious way of posting. You have yet to even actually address your original claim that creation is when God created both good and evil people. It is as though you cannot distinguish between the eternity of God, and the plan of redemption that takes place in the boundaries of time.

Address the posts!!!!!!!!!

The KJV is the only version that translates it "before of old" and it does so because that was the type of vocabulary used at the time. But even so, it does not mean timeless. It means in time past. Nothing there indicates that it was at creation. When in time past is not stated, but because of the things I said in the post you are responding to but did not address, only repeated yourself, it cannot mean at creation can it? Everything was very good as God created it.

I agree that in time past (before Jude wrote that), those people infiltrating the church that Jude is writing about were ordained to condemnation. But that is not the issue. The issue is your claim that God created at creation some for condemnation and some for mercy. It was his decree that all would fall into condemnation through Adam, he ordained the means of that, and that some would receive mercy. They had to all be under condemnation in order for any to receive mercy. You keep ignoring that, never ever addressing it, and simply begin posting scriptures that say some are condemned and some receive mercy.

NO ONE DISAGREES WITH THAT!

 

[Arial]

That's enough, so does the

Also the AKJV

For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ.

Besides that, it was way b4 they were born, so when they were born, their condemnation was sealed. Also see the comments by John Gill, we agree

Adress the posts!!!!!!!!!

The KJV is the only version that translates it "before of old" and it does so because that was the type of vocabulary used at the time. But even so, it does not mean timeless. It means in time past. Nothing there indicates that it was at creation. When in time past is not stated, but because of the things I said in the post you are responding to but did not address, only repeated yourself, it cannot mean at creation can it? Everything was very good as God created it.

 

[Josheb]

That shows you that some were destined to disobedience.

Yes..... and those people were destined after creation. Long after creation. According to the text of scripture they were assigned that destiny during the era of the prophets, not beforehand.

Even though Rom 10 is about jews, its true of some gentiles as well.

Perhaps, but not according to Romans 1:16. That verse was misused and it's time for you to stop trying to find a way to prove Post 48 correct when it is not. It would be better of you to acknowledge the mistake and start over rather than to try and continue to prove the error correct.

Just like both jew and gentile were made vessels of mercy Rom 9:22-24

22 What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction:

23 And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory,

24 Even us, whom he hath called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?

So there, why would you think some gentiles are excluded from being vessels of wrath , when they arent excluded from being vessels of mercy.

I addressed this earlier. You've bold-faced the wrong text. The fact of the text in question is that Paul is arguing a hypothetical. Nowhere di Paul state that is what God has actually done. He simply asked, rhetorically, "What if God did do that?"

• What if God made people stand on their heads when they professed Christ as Lord and Savior?
• What if God burned a visible circle on the tops of the heads of people He's saved?
• What if God made Christians grow a third arm?
• What if God turned the skins of the damned polka-dotted?
• What if God made His glory known by making the earth change its direction of rotation?
• What if God made His power known in the vessels of wrath?

So, here again, you've screwed up the exegesis by assuming a hypothetically rhetorical argument is a factual statement.

You have jews destined to disobedience 1 Pet 2:8 and Gentiles.

Nope. There are no Jews mentioned in that verse.

1 Corinthians 1:2-25
20Where is the wise person? Where is the scribe? Where is the debater of this age? Has God not made foolish the wisdom of the world? 21For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not come to know God, God was pleased through the foolishness of the message preached to save those who believe. 22For indeed Jews ask for signs and Greeks search for wisdom; 23but we preach Christ crucified, to Jews a stumbling block, and to Gentiles foolishness, 24but to those who are the called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. 25For the foolishness of God is wiser than mankind, and the weakness of God is stronger than mankind.

When the NT writers spoke of a "stumbling block" they were using an idiom common to their day. It was an idiom that had its origin in the prophetic words of God and it applied solely to the Jews. The pagan, Gentile version of the stumbling block was that of foolishness.

• The apostles preached the gospel.
• To the Jew, the gospel was a stumbling block.
• To the Greek/Gentile, the gospel was foolishness.

Romans 9:30-33
30What shall we say then? That Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, attained righteousness, but the righteousness that is by faith; 31however, Israel, pursuing a law of righteousness, did not arrive at that law. 32Why? Because they did not pursue it by faith, but as though they could by works. They stumbled over the stumbling stone, 33just as it is written: "Behold, I am laying in Zion a stone of stumbling, and a rock of offense; and whoever believes in him will not be put to shame.”

This is another example when the idiom is used and, again, it is used exclusively for the Jews and no one else. Who is the "they" in this passage? Jews!!! Jews stumbled over the stumbling stone. Where was the stumbling stone laid? In Zion! God did not lay the stumbling block in Rome, or Alexandria, or any Gentile city. He laid it in Zion where the Jews live.

The gospel tripped them up! They were expecting a Messiah. The Gentiles had no such expectation. That expectation was uniquely Judaic. Judaism was quite divided over the matter because the Sadducees were nihilists (they believed a person lived one life and then died and there was no resurrection, nor life after death) and the smaller sect, the Pharisees we not (they believed there was a resurrection from the grave and life after death). Jesus came along and explicitly affirmed the minority sect's point of view but they ALL still rejected him. Why? Because he claimed equality with God.

Huge stumbling block for Jews.

The Gentiles, on the other hand, had a much different response to the gospel. In the pagan mythologies gods came down from their realm in human appearance quite frequently. It was hard to find pagan god that hadn't come down and appeared in human form. Their problem was humans do not come back from the grave, and it cannot possibly be a Jew who managed to pull that off. Furthermore, that wretched Jew is now supposed to be King of ALL kings so even Caesar has to bow the knee! pffft! All of it is absurd.


Acts 17:16-35 (excerpted for the sake of space)
16Now while Paul was waiting for them in Athens, his spirit was being provoked within him as he observed that the city was full of idols. 17So he was reasoning in the synagogue with the Jews and the God-fearing Gentiles, and in the marketplace every day with those who happened to be present. 18And some of the Epicurean and Stoic philosophers as well were conversing with him. Some were saying, “What could this scavenger of tidbits want to say?” Others, “He seems to be a proclaimer of strange deities,”—because he was preaching Jesus and the resurrection. 19And they took him and brought him to the Areopagus, saying, “May we know what this new teaching is which you are proclaiming? 20For you are bringing some strange things to our ears; so we want to know what these things mean.” ....22So Paul stood in the midst of the Areopagus and said, “Men of Athens, I see that you are very religious in all respects. 23For while I was passing through and examining the objects of your worship, I also found an altar with this inscription, ‘TO AN UNKNOWN GOD.’ .................Therefore, since we are the descendants of God, we ought not to think that the Divine Nature is like gold or silver or stone, an image formed by human skill and thought. 30So having overlooked the times of ignorance, God is now proclaiming to mankind that all people everywhere are to repent, 31because He has set a day on which He will judge the world in righteousness through a man whom He has appointed, having furnished proof to all people by raising him from the dead.” 32Now when they heard of the resurrection of the dead, some began to scoff, but others said, “We shall hear from you again concerning this.” 33So Paul went out from among them. 34But some men joined him and believed, among whom also were Dionysius the Areopagite and a woman named Damaris, and others with them.

Gentiles scoff. Jews stumble. Jews stumble over the cornerstone God laid in Zion. Gentiles scoff at the entire premise of anything Jewish having authority over them.

 

[Josheb]

What you think to all them gentiles God left them to themselves for centuries, not sending them any knowedge of Himself or Christ ?

I think it is irrelevant to this discussion of Post 48 and I will not be baited into a change of topic until the matter of Post 48 is resolved. Ask anyone here: when you trade posts with me you are trading posts with someone who will rely on scripture (not doctrine) and be relentless doing so. You're trading posts with someone exceedingly practiced in forensic analysis and often unyielding when it comes to staying on topic.

I am happy to discuss just about anything with just about anyone but I do not chase squirrels around the forum from topic to topic to topic and this scripture and that scripture and, oh! Look! There's another verse! And what about this one! because those people are disingenuous.

That, and I don't trade posts with trolls.

Post 48 is wrong. I was asked about Post 48 and I answered and addressed that post. You seem to recognize the verses are, in fact, about Jews but you're having difficulty letting go of the over-generalization. It would be better for you to be honoest and forthcoming and better for this conversation and the entire thread for you to acknowledge Post 48 is incorrect. Once that's resolved you can then attempt another argument for what you believe but I will not wantonly change from one scripture to another until you acknowledge the facts already in evidence.
The verses quoted in Post 48 do NOT support the premise God made two different peoples at creation. Those verses - ALL THREE OF THEM - are specifically and explicitly about Jews only and the conditions that existed for the recipients of those letters due to the function of God's prophecies.

And you should not be delaying any further. You should be saying, "Yes, Josh, I see what you posted is correct. May I attempt to prove my case another way?"

To which I will most likely say, "Sure. Have at it. I'll give it a read."

Ask anyone here and they'll tell you that is what I do. I will a) affirm that which bears integrity with scripture, b) inquire about that which either I do not understand or is not itself clear, and b) I will refute that which does not bear integrity with whole scripture. That's exactly what I have done over the last five pages and in the other op you authored. Where you got something correct, I affirmed it. Yep, that's true. Yep, that's correct. I asked many questions of questions (some of them are still unanswered). And when I came upon something that clearly does not reconcile with the whole of scripture, I corrected it with scripture.

It's time for you to acknowledge Post 48 is incorrect before moving on to other matters.

Now Christ didnt die for them appointed to wrath, but them appointed to eternal life through Him

I agree .

I completely agree but that statement can be misleading. Christ's sacrifice is sufficent for everyone who has ever lived and ever will live to be saved. The power inherent in the work of Christ on Calvary and his shed blood is infinite. In spite of that fact, or perhaps because of that fact, most people will not be saved. Why? Because the sacrifice of Christ is efficient only in the lives of those God actually saves. Monenergists and synergists divide over this last point because monergists attribute ALL of salvation solely to God while synergists attribute some of salvation to the sinner's volitional agency. The former will say Christ is efficient only in the lives of those who God chose, who God called, who God dragged to Christ, those to whom God gave salvific faith as part of His saving them. Synergists will say the sinner has an inherent ability to choose God even when still dead in sin and enslaved therein but both will agree Christ's sacrifice is effective only in the lives of those God actually saves.

And, if I read your posts correctly, you and I appear to agree God decided who He was going to save before He created a single human. We divide over who it was He saved because you believe an object of mercy was never an object of wrath despite his having been a sinner, someone who by nature is unrighteous.

And at this point in the conversation, we need to resolve the matter of Post 48 before moving on. If I continue to read procrastination, or any other effort at obfuscation I will move on to another thread because there's no sense in either of use repeating ourselves. Close out Post 48. I think the refutation of Post 48 proves fatal to your position but if you want to attempt another proof I will read it....

...after the failure of Post 48 has been acknowledged. Those verses do not state what they were made to say.

 

[Josheb]

I believe all of Gods eternal purposes were decided b4 the fall......

There is no dispute with that!!

And I agree. God deciding His purposes (eternal or otherwise) before the fall does not preclude a chronology existing within the history of creation. It does not preclude vessels of mercy from ALSO experiencing wrath, either. It is not eternal purpose that is disputed. It is the falsehood of two peoples at the onset of creation and the false dichotomy of wrath versus mercy (and the misuse of scripture when trying to prove these errors).

 

[brightfame52]

Some men were born for destruction 12 Pet 2:12

12 But these, as natural brute beasts, made to be taken and destroyed, speak evil of the things that they understand not; and shall utterly perish in their own corruption;

Peter here writing about false teachers, states unequivocally that they were as if brute beast, made or born to be taken and destroyed. The word made here is the greek word gennaō means:

of men who fathered children

1. to be born
2. to be begotten

And the word destroyed phthora means:

1. corruption, destruction, perishing
   1. that which is subject to corruption, what is perishable
   2. in the Christian sense, eternal misery in hell
2. in the NT, in an ethical sense, corruption i.e. moral decay

They have been born to bring in damnable heresies 2 Pet 2:1

But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction.

Now these Christ did not die for, and are the ones appointed to wrath, which they Christ died for are not appointed to. 3

 

[Josheb]

Some men were born for destruction 12 Pet 2:12

Some false prophets and teachers were born for destruction.

12 But these, as natural brute beasts, made to be taken and destroyed, speak evil of the things that they understand not; and shall utterly perish in their own corruption;

Peter here writing about false teachers, states unequivocally that they were as if brute beast, made or born to be taken and destroyed. The word made here is the greek word gennaō means:

of men who fathered children

1. to be born
2. to be begotten

Yes and those men are specified as false prophets and teachers.

Now these Christ did not die for, and are the ones appointed to wrath, which they Christ died for are not appointed to. 3

.
Romans 5:6
For while we were still helpless, at the right time Christ died for the ungodly.

Neither you, nor Peter knows whether any of those false teachers/prophets ever repented and turned toward God in salvation. Be careful when making over generalizations from scripture.

1 Peter 3:18
For Christ also suffered once for sins, the just for the unjust, that He might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive by the Spirit,

Colossians 1:21
And although you were previously alienated and hostile in attitude, engaged in evil deeds, yet He has now reconciled you in His body of flesh through death, in order to present you before Him holy and blameless and beyond reproach...

The death of Christ, the effect, the power, of Christ's work overcoming sin and the grave is sufficient to save everyone, but it is efficient only in the lives of those God actually saves. Furthermore, the cross serves multiple purposes. The exact same cross that saves also condemns. Therefore, when the word "for" is used in a teleological sense (the function served by his death) you have to be discriminating, not over-generalizing. Christ did die for everyone. He died for the salvation of some and the damnation of others. There is no one not covered by the cross. The question is whether or not they are covered salvifically.

There was a man in Corinth who had been having sex with his father's wife; the immoral man's stepmother, by todays measure. No one did anything to correct the man or address the effects of that immoral conduct on that local body of believers. Paul was appalled. Although the text does not specify any other immoral conduct of the man, we can readily imagine a man who will have sex with his father's wife is a man who is indiscrete with his sexual conduct in general. He was probably having sex with many people, and they might not all have been females. Corinth was the home for temples of Apollos, Poseidon, and Aphrodite, the goddess of love. Sexual conduct was part of the ritual worship in the Aphrodite cult. The priests of Aphrodite were women, and the temple staffed prostitutes (again, not all of which were females). Profligate sex was part of the Corinthians culture. Regardless of whether or not this man having sex with his mother-in-law was having sex with others, God had a pile of laws prohibiting sex with family members.

Leviticus 18:6-18
6‘None of you shall approach any blood relative [f]of his to uncover nakedness; I am the LORD. 7You shall not uncover the nakedness of your father, that is, the nakedness of your mother. She is your mother; you are not to uncover her nakedness. 8You shall not uncover the nakedness of your father’s wife; it is your father’s nakedness. 9As for the nakedness of your sister, either your father’s daughter or your mother’s daughter, whether born in the household or born outside the household, you shall not uncover their nakedness. 10The nakedness of your son’s daughter or your daughter’s daughter, their nakedness you shall not uncover; for [g]their nakedness is yours. 11The nakedness of your father’s wife’s daughter, born to your father, she is your sister; you shall not uncover her nakedness. 12You shall not uncover the nakedness of your father’s sister; she is your father’s blood relative. 13You shall not uncover the nakedness of your mother’s sister, for she is your mother’s blood relative. 14You shall not uncover the nakedness of your father’s brother. You shall not approach his wife; she is your aunt. 15You shall not uncover the nakedness of your daughter-in-law. She is your son’s wife; you shall not uncover her nakedness. 16You shall not uncover the nakedness of your brother’s wife; it is your brother’s nakedness. 17You shall not uncover the nakedness of a woman and of her daughter, nor shall you take her son’s daughter or her daughter’s daughter, to uncover her nakedness; they are blood relatives. It is an outrageous sin. 18And you shall not [h]marry a woman in addition to her sister https://biblehub.com/nasb_/leviticus/18.htm#fnas a second wife while she is alive, to uncover her nakedness.

The reason I bring this up is because Paul decided how to handle the individual.

1 Corinthians 5:5
I have decided to turn such a person over to Satan for the destruction of his body, so that his spirit may be saved on the day of the Lord.

Hand him over to Satan so he can be saved .

The 2 Peter 2 text is about false teachers, and you have no idea whether any of them ever repented and got saved. Be careful about overgeneralizing this text to apply to all humanity.

 

[brightfame52]

Some false prophets and teachers were born for destruction

Yes they are people correct? Some people are born made for destruction, vessels of wrath. Do you think Christ died for them to save them from destruction?

 

[brightfame52]

For while we were still helpless, at the right time Christ died for the ungodly

The we are the elect vessels of mercy not the vessels of wrath being fitted for destruction. Were the false teachers of 2 Peter 2:12 included in the we here in Rom 5:6 No for Christ made them to be born for destruction.

 

[Josheb]

The we are the elect vessels of mercy not the vessels of wrath being fitted for destruction.

Argumentum ad nauseam.

Were the false teachers of 2 Peter 2:12 included in the we here in Rom 5:6 No for Christ made them to be born for destruction.

Argumentum ad nauseam.

Repeating the same position again and again does not make it true. It has already been demonstrated that you do not exegete scripture well, you chronically misuse and abuse scripture and you haven't addressed the specific points others have broached pertaining to your position. You attribute everything to the beginning, the point of creation and never allow for any change after that fact. All the relevant scriptures pertaining to post hoc changes have been ignored and when they are broached the only response is ad nauseam.

Simply out: There are too many errors in the defense of the op for the op to be correct and the constant avoidance of the errors proves they won't be corrected here in this thread.

 

[brightfame52]

Argumentum ad nauseam

No it's not. Some people are born into this world to be destroyed and not salvation. For these God predetermined they become false teachers and He would destroy them for it, as if they were wild beast

 

[Josheb]

No it's not.

Well, let's see.

Some people are born into this world to be destroyed and not salvation. For these God predetermined they become false teachers and He would destroy them for it, as if they were wild beast

How is that any different than...

And we know this refers back to creation Gen 5:1-2
When He created man. When else
The vessels of wrath were always appointed to Wrath but the vessels of mercy were always appointed to mercy.
When He created them their destiny was set.
Some men were born for destruction
Some people are born made for destruction, vessels of wrath.
Some people are born into this world to be destroyed and not salvation.

All you've done is repeat yourself in different ways. Have you got anything new to add?




You were on the correct track when you said,

No, God created men already with their destinies purposed.

Because that is a statement of teleology, not ontology. That is to say, the function served versus the nature of the thing apart from its purpose. The problem is that you have said there are two different types of people and not two different functions they serve. You have been inconsistent with the created order, alternatively saying God made people of wrath in one post and Genesis 1 stating God made good people in another. Or in one post saying all people are born unrighteous by nature but by nature they are not objects of wrath in another post. You ask, "and the response was "Okay, everything was very good, relevance"

The relevance is you've got God making people of wrath and calling it good.

You asked, "Show where I posted anything about God made man in the beginning inherently evil." I asked, "When, specifically, did God make them vessels of dishonor?" and the answer was, "When He created man." You've also stated, "God created two sets of people, one set for wrath and destruction for sin, the other set for mercy and Glory from sin," and I responded saying Genesis 1:31 proves that is incorrect. Your response was, "No its not." I then asked does Gen. 1:31 state everyone was good or not? you said it was a functional good, making no mention of moral or spiritual good. People of inherent wrath are not good. It cannot be said that a person is bad by nature by God's design and have God calling it good.

And every effort to get you to be more discriminating has resulted in some variation of,

Some people are born into this world to be destroyed and not salvation. For these God predetermined they become false teachers and He would destroy them for it, as if they were wild beast

Argumentum ad nauseam

It's the same statement post multiple times. 2 Peter 2 suffered the same overgeneralization every other text cited has suffered, too. You seem to be trying to assert a Reformed hamartiology and monergistic soteriology which, if that is the case, I support. But you also seem to be asserting a radical, extreme determinism that is not consistent with Reformed theology. You sound more like A. W Pink (who is considered more deterministic) than Maryn Lloyd Jones or R. C. Sproul (who are considered more classically Reformed).

Are you trying to assert a Reformed hamartiology and monergism? Are you trying to present a case for Calvinist soteriology?

 

[brightfame52]

It was also known and had been prophesied that some were appointed to disobedience again 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.

Now Luke 2:34

And Simeon blessed them, and said unto Mary his mother, Behold, this child is set for the fall and rising again of many in Israel; and for a sign which shall be spoken against;

The word set keimai means:

metaph.

to be (by God's intent) set, i.e. destined, appointed

This verse corresponds with 1 Pet 2:8

The word fall in Lk 2:34 is the word ptōsis:

a falling, downfall, metaph. to fall under judgment, came under condemnation

that many may fall and bring upon themselves ruin, i. e. the loss of salvation, utter misery, Luke 2:34, cf. Romans 11:11.3

 

[brightfame52]

The Vessels of Wrath, them which Christ did not die for, and had always been destined to wrath, are the goats on His left hand seen here Matt 25:41

41 Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand[goats], Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:

Rom 9:21-22

21 Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make[appoint] one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?

22 What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction:

Now these were in exact opposite from them who have always been the vessels of mercy, the Sheep on His right hand, whom Christ died for Jn 10:11,15 Matt 25:34

34 Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world:

This coincides with this Rom 9:23

23 And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory, 3

 

[brightfame52]

Christs coming into the world, in addition to His primary redemptive purpose for His People Chosen in Him before the foundation of the world, and to open their eyes spiritually so they may see Isa 42:6-7

6 I the Lord have called thee in righteousness, and will hold thine hand, and will keep thee, and give thee for a covenant of the people, for a light of the Gentiles;

7 To open the blind eyes, to bring out the prisoners from the prison, and them that sit in darkness out of the prison house.

There was also a secondary purpose, that was to blind the rest, those not chosen in Him, the reprobate, notice Jn 9:39

39 And Jesus said, For judgment I am come into this world, that they which see not might see; and that they which see might be made blind.

There was a people in national israel that Jesus was referring to, Rom 11:7

What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded.

But this judicial blinding isnt limited to the reprobate jews, it also applies to the reprobate gentiles. It was always Gods purpose to blind them to the truth, and never His intention to convert them by it

Jn 12:40

He hath blinded their eyes, and hardened their heart; that they should not see with their eyes, nor understand with their heart, and be converted, and I should heal them 3

 

[brightfame52]

Another scripture that confirms that some people God created for the day of His Eternal Wrath against their sins is here Prov 16:4

4 The Lord hath made all things for himself: yea, even the wicked for the day of evil.

The word for made here is used for maker as in Creator Job 36:3

I will fetch my knowledge from afar, and will ascribe righteousness to my Maker.

God has made the wicked, the vessels of wrath, for His Own Glory in demonstrating His Justice upon them for their sins.

Rom 9:20-22

20 Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus?

21 Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?

22 What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction: 4