Second Attempt at Romans 9

[FutureAndAHope]

Yup. That's the theology of the Constantinian Gentile church. They unmoored true, Biblical Christianity from its Hebrew roots and created a new RELIGION and are like a ship on the sea without a rudder and no port to call home. You've been infected with Gentile heresy. Come out from among them and be separate!

I am at work at the moment so don't have time to fully reply but:

Constantinian Dynasty: the family of the emperor Constantine the Great, which ruled (parts of) the Roman Empire from 305 until 363 CE.

My quotes come from A.D. 120-202 and 100AD. Not even close to Constantine.

If you read the church fathers they did not create a new religion, it is 100% the same as what we have now, and what the Bible teaches. As for the works of Irenaeus see what church historians say:

The work of Irenaeus Against Heresies is one of the most precious remains of early Christian antiquity. It is devoted, on the one hand, to an account and refutation of those multiform Gnostic heresies which prevailed in the latter half of the second century; and, on the other hand, to an exposition and defence of the Catholic faith. (Rev. Rambaut W. H. 1867, Against Heresies - Introductory Note)

 

[Mercy_Shown]

So we will bend the word of God according to the Human Standards of Morality as determined by the mind of Fallen man ... what could possibly go wrong with THAT plan?

‘The way of the Lord is not fair.’ - Ezekiel 18

Calvinism bends the word of God. Read Heb 6:4-6 to a Calvinist and they will bend it into a pretzel to avoid what it plainly states. I think God is on a different plane than either Calvinism or Arminianism.

If God is as Calvinism claims, all men will be saved. If He is like Arminianism claims, all men will be lost.

 

[FutureAndAHope]

Again, Saul is making a distinction between children of the flesh (Esau, and his descendants), and children of promise (Jacob, and his descendants.) You're twisting what Saul is saying.

Of course, Paul is making that statement, but for what purpose? To show that it is the promise, not the right by ancestry that counts. Now in his day, the Gentiles had just received the promise, but they did not have the right by birth to it (as the Jews did). This is the point he is making.

As mentioned by the Earliest Church Fathers, they additionally saw the story in Romans 9, meaning the birthright (promise) was now transferred to the undeserving younger, the one not expected to receive it, the Gentile.

 

[FutureAndAHope]

I said:

The view that Jacob and Esau’s is a prophetic picture is supported by the Early Church. Who saw the story of Jacob and Esau as representing the fact that God would accept the Gentiles, the younger, and no longer use Israel as the primary vehicle of salvation although they originally had the birthright.

to which you replied:

Yup. That's the theology of the Constantinian Gentile church. They unmoored true, Biblical Christianity from its Hebrew roots and created a new RELIGION and are like a ship on the sea without a rudder and no port to call home. You've been infected with Gentile heresy. Come out from among them and be separate!
Gentiles writing about their false teaching that Gentiles have replaced Israel in the Redemptive plan of God for His Chosen people and apple of His eye: Israel.

Maybe I stated it wrongly, so I have made some mods:

The view that Jacob and Esau’s is a prophetic picture is supported by the Early Church. Who saw the story of Jacob and Esau as representing the fact that God would accept the Gentiles, the younger, undeserving, and no longer use the law or Israel as the only vehicle of salvation although they originally had the birthright.

 

[jeremiah1five]

Of course, Paul is making that statement, but for what purpose? To show that it is the promise, not the right by ancestry that counts. Now in his day, the Gentiles had just received the promise, but they did not have the right by birth to it (as the Jews did). This is the point he is making.

No, he's making that statement to show his readers that the between to two boys born to Abraham (Ishmael and Isaac), and the two boys born to Isaac (Esau and Jacob) that the birthright went through both Isaac and then Jacob and not through Ishmael and Esau, and that the Abrahamic promise by going from Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and then Jacobs twelve sons, an inheritance was created by God with each child when they became adults. That's why it's called an inheritance. And once the inheritance and birthright established by God individually (as God made promise to each son of Abraham (Isaac and Jacob), Jesus' statement to the woman at the well "Salvation" is of the Jews" established that birthright through the seed (DNA) of Abraham. Jesus reiterated this truth to one of the great grandsons of Abraham who asked how he could INHERIT eternal life and Jesus directed him and instructed him to continue to obey the Law:

25 And, behold, a certain lawyer stood up, and tempted him, saying, Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?
26 He said unto him, What is written in the law? how readest thou? (Direction)
27 And he answering said, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind; and thy neighbour as thyself.
28 And he said unto him, Thou hast answered right: this do, and thou shalt live. (Instruction)
Lk 10:25–28.

It cannot get any clearer. Jesus is directing and instructing a son of Abraham to his inheritance of the promises God gave to Abraham to continue to obey the Law and he "shalt live." Jesus is establishing both inheritance and birthright to one of Abraham's seed. It makes no sense at all and is the height of foolishness to say that Saul is breaking with Jesus and that the Abrahamic promises of God, promises the text say is "everlasting" will be "abolished" or destroyed by Saul's words the way you re-interpret them, that there is no longer an inheritance in the Abrahamic family as God decreed. It is further foolishness to teach a new doctrine that Jesus rightly directed this Hebrew man and son of Abraham to the Law as was his inheritance and birthright ordained by God in an "everlasting" covenant and then several weeks later POOF! The cross nullifies God's decreed inheritance and birthright to the seed of Abraham. Your interpretation of Saul's words in his letter to Jewish Christians at Rome, true seed of Abraham, breaks with the evidence in Scripture that by passing the covenant promises to Isaac (and not Ishmael) and again to Jacob (and not Easu), son and grandson, that God has established not only inheritance but also birthright to the children of Israel in all generations from Abraham even to today.

As mentioned by the Earliest Church Fathers, they additionally saw the story in Romans 9, meaning the birthright (promise) was now transferred to the undeserving younger, the one not expected to receive it, the Gentile.

I'll address these Gentile church fathers in my next reply.

 

[jeremiah1five]

I said:


to which you replied:


Maybe I stated it wrongly, so I have made some mods:

The view that Jacob and Esau’s is a prophetic picture is supported by the Early Church. Who saw the story of Jacob and Esau as representing the fact that God would accept the Gentiles, the younger, undeserving, and no longer use the law or Israel as the only vehicle of salvation although they originally had the birthright.

No, I understood you perfectly. You are misunderstanding the intent and clear text of Saul's words to Jewish Christians everywhere to teach for some reason Saul is breaking from Yahweh and Yeshua and having Saul say that the everlasting covenant God established with Abraham, then Isaac, and Jacob, is no longer an inheritance and birthright by your misinterpretation of Saul's words.
This re-interpretation of the text of Scripture is one the face clearly in error.
God deemed His promises to Abraham and to his seed an inheritance and a birthright to the children of Israel, a people who living today are the true seed of Abraham and God's promises to him flow perfectly to his seed, a people now living in Israel and in Gentile lands.

Gentiles have not replaced Israel in the covenant promises given to Father Abraham in ANY generation for God made NO COVENANT with Gentiles nor transferred His covenants to them.

Now, let me tell you where your heresy came from.
Throughout Hebrew history non-Hebrews (Gentiles) have always been enemies to the Hebrew people. Whether it came from the five kings Abraham was involved in defeating, or in the rescue of Lot and fearing retaliation from those his 300 men defeated, to Egyptians and the various tribes Joshua and the twelve tribes destroyed out of the land of Canaan, to Assyrians and Babylonians to the Greek Alexander and then the Romans, Gentiles have continue to hold animosity against God's Chosen people. Even when Jesus was on the planet Gentiles carried a hatred for the Hebrew people. Then, when the Jewish Temple was destroyed (by Gentiles) and the "ism" of Judaism was on the decrease and Gentile salvation was on the increase, these Gentiles that became born-again carried that hatred into their new lives in Christ and that animosity expressed itself in determining that through the destruction of the Jewish Temple and the Jewish nation by Romans that a new view towards Israel and the Jewish salvation was expressed in the writings of Gentile Christians who were prominent in Gentile culture and soon such bias began to take on a life of its own. Without Jews to stop them Gentiles saw the destruction of national Israel as God's judgment against this people and the ascendency of Gentile culture in Hebrew salvation began to take root. First, Gentile Christians of the time unmoored their church from its Hebrew roots. Once this happened and Gentiles began to re-interpret the Hebrew Scriptures with a Gentile culture mindset, all the Hebrew history, events, and culture began to be re-interpreted with a Gentile culture mindset and with no Jews to "be a light to the Gentiles" a new religion emerged with the designation of "Christian" as its designation and here we are, 1900 years later and that same anti-God, anti-Jewish, anti-Hebrew culture teachings like yours based in part on the heresies of the Gentile church fathers have taken hold of Gentile Christian theology and denied Abraham's seed of their covenants and excluded them from their God-ordained inheritance even to this day.

Whether you see it or not, prophecy is being fulfilled in our lifetimes before our very eyes in which the children of Israel are on the ascendency and both worlds are destined to collide ending with God's destruction of the Gentile nations and the re-establishing of the Hebrew people into their Promised Land and a re-installation of their culture to a prominence never before seen or experienced by the Lord's Chosen people Israel.
Christ is returning to join in the great battle called Armageddon in which the forces of God and Israel against the forces of evil and Gentiles will be waged with Christ, the King of Israel shall emerge victorious against God's enemies, and He will sit upon the throne of David at Jerusalem and rule the conquered nations with a rod of iron, and lead and guide God's Chosen people with a Shepherd's staff in the very near future. Among other events on the world's stage this conflict between Israel and Hamas is only birth pains and will culminate with the return of Israel's Messiah to rule the day.
And Gentiles (non-Hebrews.)


14 Behold, the day of the LORD cometh,
And thy spoil shall be divided in the midst of thee.
2 For I will gather all nations against Jerusalem to battle;
And the city shall be taken, and the houses rifled, and ethe women ravished;
And half of the city shall go forth into captivity,
And the residue of the people shall not be cut off from the city.
3 Then shall the LORD go forth, and fight against those nations,
As when he fought in the day of battle.
4 And his feet shall stand in that day upon the mount of Olives,
Which is before Jerusalem on the east,
And the mount of Olives shall cleave in the midst thereof toward the east and toward the west,
And there shall be a very great valley;
Zech. 14:1-4.

And THIS is only Zechariah. There are other Hebrew prophets I can quote from that will describe the same thing: Israel's establishing of their nation and Jesus Christ as their King and an end to the heresy and false teaching of the Gentile church culture which sought to divide Israel from her inheritance and Birthright, in order for Israe to be that light to the Gentiles and lead them in the way everlasting.
Salvation is OF THE JEWS.

 

[jeremiah1five]

I am at work at the moment so don't have time to fully reply but:

Constantinian Dynasty: the family of the emperor Constantine the Great, which ruled (parts of) the Roman Empire from 305 until 363 CE.

My quotes come from A.D. 120-202 and 100AD. Not even close to Constantine.

If you read the church fathers they did not create a new religion, it is 100% the same as what we have now, and what the Bible teaches. As for the works of Irenaeus see what church historians say:

The work of Irenaeus Against Heresies is one of the most precious remains of early Christian antiquity. It is devoted, on the one hand, to an account and refutation of those multiform Gnostic heresies which prevailed in the latter half of the second century; and, on the other hand, to an exposition and defence of the Catholic faith. (Rev. Rambaut W. H. 1867, Against Heresies - Introductory Note)

Soon after I was born again some 46 years ago, I learned of the church fathers and the history of the church and wished that I had the money to buy the works of these people so I could learn more of the history of the church. But for God's purposes He kept me from such works and although I would access these writings and such intermittingly through my spiritual growth, I began to see through a study of Scripture that most of the works by these men in church history was not what I read in Scripture.

My prayer to God was "teach me" and "use me" and boy, did He ever.
Here I am, going on 47 years of biblical and historical education in the things of God I found many things in contending for the faith once delivered to the saints of the Most High, that "saints" originally was applied to the children of Israel without prejudice. I learned that the original "church" we understand today is not Gentile, but Jewish. Don't get me wrong here, Gentiles have and are being saved and constitute "church" in its Greek definition, but at the time of Moses and the Tabernacle and his use by God to deliver the children of Israel from their bondage and Hebrews were tracked out of Egypt and landed just outside of Canaan, about 4 million Jews occupied the desert in the Jordan valley and became the "Great Congregation" mentioned in Samuel's prophecies and the Psalms, and that the Gentile church is and was called out of the world in this present dispensation, but that everything in the bible had its roots and founding upon the Hebrew nation,

In the course of history, I also learned that by study of Scripture and study of the church fathers - who all were Gentile - that once the Gentile church leadership separated themselves and Gentile Christianity from its Hebrew roots a new religion came about: Gentile Christianity.

A Gentile cultural mindset could not adequately interpret the Hebrew Scripture without a Jew present to be a light unto them. But there was no Jew present in order to do just that.
In short, you understand the Hebrew Scripture with a Gentile mindset, but the Hebrew Scripture of both OT and NT can only be understood with a Jewish culture mindset and with a prejudice in place, come up with heresies that God has rejected His covenant people and replaced Israel with Gentiles.
Nothing could be further from the truth.

Scripture says God has an "everlasting" covenant with Abram the Hebrew. Scripture also identifies the true Church and that would be Israel in the desert.
Scripture says God is betrothed to Israel thus making Israel the true bride of God.
I also find NO COVENANT in the Law, Psalms, and Prophets a covenant between God and Gentiles as I find in those same Scriptures God making and having covenant with the apple of His eye: Israel.
Were all Gentile church fathers wrong? No.
But they were all wrong in certain places and the teaching in the Gentile church that unmoors itself from its Hebrew roots the potential for error exists.
Irenaeus is one of those church fathers who has it wrong.
As I leave this thread, I hope you also realize these facts and come to the knowledge of the truth.
It's a much safer place until the LORD returns.

 

[Mr GLee]

It cannot get any clearer. Jesus is directing and instructing a son of Abraham to his inheritance of the promises God gave to Abraham to continue to obey the Law and he "shalt live." Jesus is establishing both inheritance and birthright to one of Abraham's seed. It makes no sense at all and is the height of foolishness to say that Saul is breaking with Jesus and that the Abrahamic promises of God, promises the text say is "everlasting" will be "abolished" or destroyed by Saul's words the way you re-interpret them, that there is no longer an inheritance in the Abrahamic family as God decreed. It is further foolishness to teach a new doctrine that Jesus rightly directed this Hebrew man and son of Abraham to the Law as was his inheritance and birthright ordained by God in an "everlasting" covenant and then several weeks later POOF! The cross nullifies God's decreed inheritance and birthright to the seed of Abraham. Your interpretation of Saul's words in his letter to Jewish Christians at Rome, true seed of Abraham, breaks with the evidence in Scripture that by passing the covenant promises to Isaac (and not Ishmael) and again to Jacob (and not Easu), son and grandson, that God has established not only inheritance but also birthright to the children of Israel in all generations from Abraham even to today.

The everlasting seed (spiritual ) not dying fleshly. . . not the seed seen the temporal dying .

Mankind living out the appointment to die once and then his fleshly body return to dust and temporal Spirit returns to the Father who gave it temporality

Is first given through Abel the apostle prophet as the first martyr.

Therefore setting up the second born to indicate all of born again mankind .In the end of the geanalolgy leading to the Son of man our brother in the Lord Jesus The two different genealogies Matthew and Luke the other witness must be compared having the same result.

Genesis 4 25-26 And Adam knew his wife again; and she bare a son, and called his name Seth: For God, said she, hath appointed me another seed instead of Abel, whom Cain slew.And to Seth, to him also there was born a son; and he called his name Enos: then began men to call upon the name of the Lord. . . . . . . . . .Not after the word Abraham who also represented the born again seed (second birth) of Christ who works in us yoked with his powerful labor of love. .

Genesis like most doctrines sets the pattern.

Abraham his born again name to signify the Father of all the nations of the world. Previously before our Holy Father renamed Abram, the father of one family to Abraham the born agin name . Abrams father a Hittite and mother a Amorite . A new nation based on the seed that Onan spilled having no desire to please a God not seen. Just like Cain or Esau who sold their first born rights rite for a cup of hariy goat soup. Again seeing absolutely no reason to worship a unseen eternal Holy God. Silliness, foolishness to them without

The second born (seed Christ) using Seth to replace Abel in the Luke. .

Luke 3: 38 Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God.

Again then after the replacement Abel with Seth men started to call on a invisible God who reveals himself through his book of law (no philopshical theories) Not after the use of Abraham which continued the use of the one seed Christ .

The second born seed carrying on the (eternal seed ) with Abraham The Holy Father of al the nations of the world

Matthew 1: 2 Abraham begat Isaac; and Isaac begat Jacob; and Jacob begat Judas and his brethren;

Same seed (Christ) not Abram . same seed Israel not Jacob

Jesus called it one of the do not even think doctrines. making dead flesh the eternal seed God can raise up children to und unto the father of all the nations of the world out od litvly dtones caled by the Father Chrsitins

Matthew 3:9 And think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father: for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham.

1 Peter 2:5 Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ.

 

[Josheb]

These scriptures also mean what they, say, I am just interpreting Romans 9 so that the following are preserved:

God's desire to give all men a chance at life

God's desire to save the sinner

God also desires to destroy the wicked. Why have you chosen to select only two of God's desires and not all relevant ones? Why have you chosen to select only two positive ones and not consider all of God's relevant (and salient) desires, including those that apply just as equally in negative and decidedly violent ways?

God gives one of two pathways to people

Job 36:10-12 He also opens their ear to instruction, And commands that they turn from iniquity. If they obey and serve Him, They shall spend their days in prosperity, And their years in pleasures. But if they do not obey, They shall perish by the sword, And they shall die without knowledge.

1 Ch 28:9 And thou, Solomon my son, know thou the God of thy father, and serve him with a perfect heart and with a willing mind; for Jehovah searcheth all hearts, and understandeth all the imaginations of the thoughts: If thou seek him, he will be found of thee; but if thou forsake him, he will cast thee off for ever.

Isa 1:19-20 If ye be willing and obedient, ye shall eat the good of the land: but if ye refuse and rebel, ye shall be devoured with the sword; for the mouth of Jehovah hath spoken it.

Gen 4:6-7 And the Lord said to Cain, Why are you angry? and why is your face sad? If you do well, will you not have honour? and if you do wrong, sin is waiting at the door, desiring to have you, but do not let it be your master.

Deu 30:19 I call heaven and earth as witnesses today against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing; therefore choose life, that both you and your descendants may live;

Lev 26:21-24 'Then, if you walk contrary to Me, and are not willing to obey Me, I will bring on you seven times more plagues, according to your sins. I will also send wild beasts among you, which shall rob you of your children, destroy your livestock, and make you few in number; and your highways shall be desolate. 'And if by these things you are not reformed by Me, but walk contrary to Me, then I also will walk contrary to you, and I will punish you yet seven times for your sins.

Read that again. Not a single one of those biblical texts actually states "gives."

• God opens the ears of those found in fetters (verse 8 was ignored in post 3)
• God commands those whose ears He has opened.
• If those that are fettered and have had their ears opened obey and serve they will prosper.
• If those that are fettered and had their ears opened do not obey and serve their end will remain unchanged.

It's not two "pathways." It's only one and that one pathway (out of the already existing condition of fetteredness) is dependent solely upon God first opening the ears of the fettered. The opening of the ears is a gift, something given, but so too is everything else. If the turning, obeying, and serving are construed as works then you've ended up with a salvation-by-works doctrine and not a salvation by grace through faith doctrine. Salvation by works is heresy.

It is also critically necessary to acknowledge and understand every single one of those passages was spoken to and spoken about a people who 1) already lived in a God-initiated covenant relationship and 2) already believed in God, His existence, and His power. Not a single one of those texts is to or about any atheist.


So, I must ask, why has that been presented as if it is applicable to everyone, including the atheist?

 

[jeremiah1five]

The everlasting seed (spiritual ) not dying fleshly. . . not the seed seen the temporal dying .

Mankind living out the appointment to die once and then his fleshly body return to dust and temporal Spirit returns to the Father who gave it temporality

Is first given through Abel the apostle prophet as the first martyr.

Therefore setting up the second born to indicate all of born again mankind .In the end of the geanalolgy leading to the Son of man our brother in the Lord Jesus The two different genealogies Matthew and Luke the other witness must be compared having the same result.

Genesis 4 25-26 And Adam knew his wife again; and she bare a son, and called his name Seth: For God, said she, hath appointed me another seed instead of Abel, whom Cain slew.And to Seth, to him also there was born a son; and he called his name Enos: then began men to call upon the name of the Lord. . . . . . . . . .Not after the word Abraham who also represented the born again seed (second birth) of Christ who works in us yoked with his powerful labor of love. .

Genesis like most doctrines sets the pattern.

Abraham his born again name to signify the Father of all the nations of the world. Previously before our Holy Father renamed Abram, the father of one family to Abraham the born agin name . Abrams father a Hittite and mother a Amorite . A new nation based on the seed that Onan spilled having no desire to please a God not seen. Just like Cain or Esau who sold their first born rights rite for a cup of hariy goat soup. Again seeing absolutely no reason to worship a unseen eternal Holy God. Silliness, foolishness to them without

The second born (seed Christ) using Seth to replace Abel in the Luke. .

Luke 3: 38 Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God.

Again then after the replacement Abel with Seth men started to call on a invisible God who reveals himself through his book of law (no philopshical theories) Not after the use of Abraham which continued the use of the one seed Christ .

The second born seed carrying on the (eternal seed ) with Abraham The Holy Father of al the nations of the world

Matthew 1: 2 Abraham begat Isaac; and Isaac begat Jacob; and Jacob begat Judas and his brethren;

Same seed (Christ) not Abram . same seed Israel not Jacob

Jesus called it one of the do not even think doctrines. making dead flesh the eternal seed God can raise up children to und unto the father of all the nations of the world out od litvly dtones caled by the Father Chrsitins

Matthew 3:9 And think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father: for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham.

1 Peter 2:5 Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ.

Was Abraham half-Hittite and half-Amorite?

 

[FutureAndAHope]

God also desires to destroy the wicked. Why have you chosen to select only two of God's desires and not all relevant ones? Why have you chosen to select only two positive ones and not consider all of God's relevant (and salient) desires, including those that apply just as equally in negative and decidedly violent ways?

Read that again. Not a single one of those biblical texts actually states "gives."

• God opens the ears of those found in fetters (verse 8 was ignored in post 3)
• God commands those whose ears He has opened.
• If those that are fettered and have had their ears opened obey and serve they will prosper.
• If those that are fettered and had their ears opened do not obey and serve their end will remain unchanged.

It's not two "pathways." It's only one and that one pathway (out of the already existing condition of fetteredness) is dependent solely upon God first opening the ears of the fettered. The opening of the ears is a gift, something given, but so too is everything else. If the turning, obeying, and serving are construed as works then you've ended up with a salvation-by-works doctrine and not a salvation by grace through faith doctrine. Salvation by works is heresy.

It is also critically necessary to acknowledge and understand every single one of those passages was spoken to and spoken about a people who 1) already lived in a God-initiated covenant relationship and 2) already believed in God, His existence, and His power. Not a single one of those texts is to or about any atheist.


So, I must ask, why has that been presented as if it is applicable to everyone, including the atheist?

What is shown clearly, is there are two choices that the same person can make, that determine their destiny:

Job 36:11 If they obey and serve Him, They shall spend their days in prosperity, And their years in pleasures.

and

Job 36:12 But if they do not obey, They shall perish by the sword, And they shall die without knowledge.

So even if that only happens to the righteous, it still shows there are two pathways, not one. No one is fixing destinies.

 

[Josheb]

What is shown clearly, is there are two choices that the same person can make, that determine their destiny:

Job 36:11 If they obey and serve Him, They shall spend their days in prosperity, And their years in pleasures.

and

Job 36:12 But if they do not obey, They shall perish by the sword, And they shall die without knowledge.

No, that is not clear. That position is solely a function of your personal, doctrinally biased, interpretation of the text. Not only is that position solely a function of personal interpretation but as I stated in the previous post, it leaves out all the contexts inherent in the passage.

This is very important, and critically so. Our doctrine(s) of salvation explains how a person - ALL persons - go from being dead and enslaved to sin to being saved from that deadly and enslaving sin and the death that comes commensurate with that sin. That doctrine must apply to everyone. Any doctrine of salvation that applies only to the saints, or only to those already living in a covenant relationship with God, or who already believes in God's existence is incomplete, at best. At worse it is totally misguided and lacking any veracity.

Take, for example, an analogy of you and I building an engine to put in a pickup. You and I take an engine block and put in the crank shaft, cam shaft, push rods, pistons, rings, bearings, and all the other components of the short block but we do not put on the heads, manifold or other remaining components. We pop that into the engine well, close the hood, step back, and take some pictures. Form the outside the truck looks complete but it's not. The truck is incomplete and does not work because it is incomplete.

Incomplete is not always wrong, but it is never whole.

EVERYTHING I have ever read from you has ALWAYS been incomplete. Sadly, this op is nt the only one. Most of the threads in this Arm v Cal board written by Arms are incomplete. They use scriptures written about Jews coming to Christ or they misuse scriptures written about those already saved and apply them to people not yet saved. Using scriptures about people who already believe in God does absolutely NOTHING to explain what happens to those who do not believe in God. It definitely does nothing to those hostiley adversarial to anything and everything pertaining to any belief in God and sin. They do not explain how anyone who does not believe any god exists comes to believe in the God they do not believe exists.

Do you understand the problem?

You have to find the verses that are about the atheist!

Those verses specifically about the atheist are the only verses applicable to an atheist conversion! There are very few of them in the Bible. I have read many of your ops. I do not respond to most because I've tried to communicate this problem many times before and have yet to be effective. The title's mention of "second attempt" caught my attention because it implies the first attempt was either incorrect or ineffective and maybe something has been learned since the first attempt. Sadly, I find covenant scriptures are still being used to explain how godless, God-denying, covenant-less people are saved. Scriptures about believers and covenant members are used and the verses that apply to atheists neglected.

Once it is realized the vast, overwhelming amount of scripture is written to and about people who already believe in God it will also be realized very little is said about the atheist. Once that is realized, it will also be realized the entire Bible, with very few exceptions, is written about a very large but very specific group of people - and they are not atheists!!! When we read the story of Noah we receive a lot of information about Noah, but very little about all the millions of people living on the planet with him. With the exception of the opening statements in Genesis 6 the entire story ignores them! None of them get saved! Not only do none of them get saved, but there's not a single word about any of them doing what the Job 36 text describes. Not one word about it. Do NOT assume Job 36 applies. Similar dynamics exist in every story in the Bible. Even the people who built the tower of Babel believed in some kind of god. The entire account of Abram/Abraham covers more than a century of human history, but it is a story of Abraham and not all the other people who lived on the planet. The record of Abraham is explicitly about a God-initiated covenant and although there were millions of people living on the planet at the time, the story is not about them. The parts of Abraham's history that do include others shows they all believed in some god or God. There are no atheists in that story. Once this overarching context is realized you'll also realize a lot of teaching on salvation misuses scripture.

These contexts cannot be left out when reading scripture.

Every op I have ever read you post always leaves those facts out. I have not read all the ops, but the ones I have read are incomplete, and woefully so. Job and his friends believed in God, the God of the Bible. The Job 36 passage explicitly specifies to whom God does what, and not a single one of them is ever said to be atheistic.

Huge hole in this op's soteriology.

So even if that only happens to the righteous, it still shows there are two pathways, not one.

The righteous do not need saving. Jesus did not come to call the righteous.

Luke 5:32
I have not come to call the righteous to repentance, but sinners.

You're making the exact same mistake made by the Pharisees and scribes. When scriptures are talking about the righteous, or the saints, those verses should not be applied to the unrighteous. Doing so creates a false equivalence (apples to oranges). The righteous and the unrighteous are two completely different types of people.

• All humans are sinful.
• Not all humans are theists.
• Not all theists are Christians.

It is both scripturally and logically fallacious to assume godless atheists and regenerate saints are comparable. They are not. It is also equally erroneous to compare godless atheistic non-believers with convent Israel who live by faith. It's not even fair to say it's an apples to oranges comparison. A more accurate analogy would be something like comparing a rotting corpse to a fruit-bearing branch!

No one is fixing destinies.

Irrelevant.

A scriptural sound position whereby the matter of destiny can be correctly measured has to first be reached and this exchange has not yet reached that point. An exegesis that ignores the inherent contexts of the scriptures used is never going to be able to correctly decide the matter of destiny.

No one is fixing destinies.

Nice move of the goal posts.

We were not discussing the matter of destinies. We were talking about the premise Job 36 and the other passages cited provide evidence of two pathways. They do not. Job 36 is about people who already believe in God and the people who obey and serve are said to be those in whom God has already acted. In the case of Job 36, they had their ears opened. They are God-believing people already who had their ears opened - and opened for the purpose of obeying and serving God. That is not two pathways. That's one.



You must find those verses that apply to atheists and use them to develop and prove how they are saved because people who deny God's existence are categorically different than those who believe God exists.


Psalm 14:1-4
The fool has said in his heart, "There is no God." They are corrupt, they have committed abominable deeds; There is no one who does good. The LORD has looked down from heaven upon the sons of men to see if there are any who understand, who seek after God. They have all turned aside, together they have become corrupt; there is no one who does good, not even one. Do all the workers of wickedness not know, who eat up my people as they eat bread, and do not call upon the Lord?

Any complete doctrine of salvation that is scripturally sound MUST start there, not Job 36. Read those four verses a couple of times and think about what they say.

 

[FutureAndAHope]

Using scriptures about people who already believe in God does absolutely NOTHING to explain what happens to those who do not believe in God.

You seem to have missed:

Job 36:13 "But the hypocrites in heart store up wrath; They do not cry for help when He binds them.

Which shows that God performs the "same" action to the sinner. But they do not cry for help.

 

[FutureAndAHope]

The title's mention of "second attempt" caught my attention because it implies the first attempt was either incorrect or ineffective and maybe something has been learned since the first attempt.

You expect every person to know everything upfront. I have prayed, sought the truth, diligently searched the writings of the early church, and come up with a new conclusion. My book explains Roman's 9 much better than any attempt here.

https://www.everybodymattersministry.com/downloads/predestination.pdf

 

[FutureAndAHope]

Psalm 14:1-4
The fool has said in his heart, "There is no God." They are corrupt, they have committed abominable deeds; There is no one who does good. The LORD has looked down from heaven upon the sons of men to see if there are any who understand, who seek after God. They have all turned aside, together they have become corrupt; there is no one who does good, not even one. Do all the workers of wickedness not know, who eat up my people as they eat bread, and do not call upon the Lord?

Any complete doctrine of salvation that is scripturally sound MUST start there, not Job 36. Read those four verses a couple of times and think about what they say.

Yes, no one born ever started righteous. It was God's gift of the cross, His goodness that led to repentance. But repentance is still a necessary step.

No one who abides in him keeps on sinning; no one who keeps on sinning has either seen him or known him. (ESV, 1 John 3:6)

 

[FutureAndAHope]

We were not discussing the matter of destinies. We were talking about the premise Job 36 and the other passages cited provide evidence of two pathways. They do not. Job 36 is about people who already believe in God and the people who obey and serve are said to be those in whom God has already acted. In the case of Job 36, they had their ears opened. They are God-believing people already who had their ears opened - and opened for the purpose of obeying and serving God. That is not two pathways. That's one.

Are you sure, are you not twisting scripture to suit your doctrine? Job is clear:

And if they are bound in fetters, Held in the cords of affliction, Then He tells them their work and their transgressions—That they have acted defiantly. He also opens their ear to instruction, And commands that they turn from iniquity. If they obey and serve Him, They shall spend their days in prosperity, And their years in pleasures. But if they do not obey, They shall perish by the sword, And they shall die without knowledge. "But the hypocrites in heart store up wrath; They do not cry for help when He binds them. They die in youth, And their life ends among the perverted persons. (NKJV,Job 36:8)

You said:

they had their ears opened. They are God-believing people already who had their ears opened - and opened for the purpose of obeying and serving God. That is not two pathways. That's one.

Wrong. There is an IF statement:

Pathway 1)
If they obey and serve Him, They shall spend their days in prosperity, And their years in pleasures.

Pathway 2)
But if they do not obey, They shall perish by the sword, And they shall die without knowledge.

Tell me how your Elect, righteous person can:

perish by the sword, And they shall die without knowledge

 

[Mr GLee]

Was Abraham half-Hittite and half-Amorite?

More of 100% Hittite and 100% Amorite The mixture of two families creates a new one. Abram .. . Father of a family.


When two or three gather together under the authority of sola scriptura. Christ is there working in dying mankind.

 

[Mr GLee]

The righteous do not need saving. Jesus did not come to call the righteous.

Luke 5:32
I have not come to call the righteous to repentance, but sinners.

Yes the righteous has already heeded the call .It not a multiple calls

All have sinned and continue to sin reveled by falling short of eternal glory . . .(being God the Faithfull Creator) all the days of thier lives living in a dying body of death sufferings hell

Not one creation has become eternal God

Romans 3:23 For all have sinned, and (continually) come short of the glory of God;

 

[Josheb]

You seem to have missed:

Job 36:13 "But the hypocrites in heart store up wrath; They do not cry for help when He binds them.

Which shows that God performs the "same" action to the sinner. But they do not cry for help.

No, I did not "miss" it. I have not missed anything. It is you who is avoiding what I have stated. Let's start simple and work through this one step at a time.


Who was Job? In one to four sentences, tell me who and what is Job.

 

[Carbon]

Calvinism bends the word of God. Read Heb 6:4-6 to a Calvinist and they will bend it into a pretzel to avoid what it plainly states. I think God is on a different plane than either Calvinism or Arminianism.

If God is as Calvinism claims, all men will be saved. If He is like Arminianism claims, all men will be lost.

Sorry friend but it's obvious you do not know Calvinism.