The powerless Arminian Jesus

[Mercy_Shown]

Like the book of Romans? Here a dot to dot connection...called the Roman road to salvation...is presented.

There is no road to salvation if it is all pre-determined. The only difference between our beliefs is that I believe everything is done for us with our consent.

 

[Arial]

In the grand scheme, it was to restore mankind to a state of free will where they could choose to love Him out of their own volition. He could change everyone's hearts to love him without their knowledge but He would know.

Surely your realize that that is completely made up. If it is anywhere in the Bible, please show it to me.

Scripture says For by him (Jesus) all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities---all things were created through him and FOR him. (Col 1:16) That it was for mankind to be in a state of free will is so far removed from that as to be shocking.

It is about God and for God---even the wicked. The Lord has made everything for his purpose, even the wicked for the day of trouble.

Romans 9:15-18 For he says to Moses, "I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion." So then it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God who has mercy. For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, "For this very purpose I have raised you up, that I might show my power in you, and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.: So then he has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whoever he wills.

22-24 What if God, desiring to show his wrath and to make known his power, has endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, in order to make known the riches of his glory for vessels of mercy, which he has prepared beforehand for glory---even us whom he has called, not from the Jews only but also from the Gentiles?

If you cannot handle a God who says and does these things, then by all means, skip right over it. Or try to find someway to make it fit your view of Him and to not be saying what it says. But if you do that, don't neglect to at least notice God in here and His self revelation, and don't skip over the little words such as "called", "human will", "God/I".

 

[Arial]

There is no condemnation for those he forenew. The lamb was slain from the foundation of the earth.

There is no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. But you have almost, not quite, hidden the issue of your darkness and light analogy, that states that the ones who love the light more than darkness are the ones who choose Christ, and the ones who don't choose him are the ones that love darkness more than the light.(Paraphrase). The implication of choosing is nowhere found in the scriptures you are using. You are reading it into them as confirmation bias.

 

[Mercy_Shown]

Surely your realize that that is completely made up. If it is anywhere in the Bible, please show it to me.

Scripture says For by him (Jesus) all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities---all things were created through him and FOR him. (Col 1:16) That it was for mankind to be in a state of free will is so far removed from that as to be shocking.

Not at all. God can create sentient free-will creatures for himself if He pleases and if it pleases Himself to allow them to choose good or evil who are we to say He can't? The ultimate question is why did he create beings who would sin only to pour Grace into some of them without their consent and leave others to sie in misery without out lifting a finger to save them? Unless He didn't.

It is about God and for God---even the wicked. The Lord has made everything for his purpose, even the wicked for the day of trouble.

And perhaps His purpose is a free-will creation worshiping Him as an unfettered choice.

Romans 9:15-18 For he says to Moses, "I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion." So then it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God who has mercy. For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, "For this very purpose I have raised you up, that I might show my power in you, and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.: So then he has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whoever he wills.

"Whom he wills." Yes, he is sovereign. He can also grant free-will to whomever He chooses. Pharaoh would have fulfilled the purpose of God either way. If He had softened his heart and let Israel go He would have glorified God. Is God's hardening and softening in this case active or passive? Should God appear to us as He is would we not perish instantly, slain by the brightness of His glory? This would be a passive result of being in His presence. Likewise, God hardens certain people. Just the God-principles harden their hearts whereas others have hearts more like wax; they soften and melt beneath His glory.

22-24 What if God, desiring to show his wrath and to make known his power, has endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, in order to make known the riches of his glory for vessels of mercy, which he has prepared beforehand for glory---even us whom he has called, not from the Jews only but also from the Gentiles?

If you cannot handle a God who says and does these things, then by all means, skip right over it. Or try to find someway to make it fit your view of Him and to not be saying what it says. But if you do that, don't neglect to at least notice God in here and His self revelation, and don't skip over the little words such as "called", "human will", "God/I".

This passage talks about some deep stuff, making it tough not just to understand but also to translate into English. Before this part, Paul explained how God can do whatever He wants with people, just like a potter shaping clay into different kinds of pots. This implies that God, as the creator, has full authority over His creation.

Then Paul turns to a question about what God is doing with those vessels He prepared for destruction. What if God wants to show His anger and power to them but is being patient instead? Paul seems to be referring to those who won't accept God's mercy, ending up separated from Him in hell. This raises a theological debate: Is God waiting for them to be destroyed, or is He giving them time to repent and become vessels of mercy?

Different Bible scholars and teachers disagree about this based on translations and their beliefs. It gets even more interesting when Paul mentions in Ephesians 2 how he used to be a "child of wrath" before God showed him mercy and love, making him alive in Christ. Some see this, along with other verses, as proof that God's patience is about giving more chances to those who haven't turned to Him yet.
So, you see, there's a lot to unpack in these verses that makes people think deeply and wrestle with different interpretations.

This is a better translation of verse 22 22 What if God, although fully intending to show [the awfulness of] His wrath and to make known His power and authority, has tolerated with much patience the vessels (objects) of [His] anger which are ripe for destruction?
Consider 2 Peter 3:9 “The Lord is not slow concerning his promise, as some count slowness; but he is patient with us, not wishing that anyone should perish, but that all should come to repentance”

 

[Mercy_Shown]

There is no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. But you have almost, not quite, hidden the issue of your darkness and light analogy, that states that the ones who love the light more than darkness are the ones who choose Christ, and the ones who don't choose him are the ones that love darkness more than the light.(Paraphrase). The implication of choosing is nowhere found in the scriptures you are using. You are reading it into them as confirmation bias.

Certainly, there is. There are many more instances of choosing language than choiceless language.

John 3:16​

“For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.

John 3:15​

that whoever believes in him may have eternal life.

John 11:25-26​

Jesus said to her, “I am the resurrection and the life. Whoever believes in me, though he die, yet shall he live, and everyone who lives and believes in me shall never die. Do you believe this?”

John 6:40​

For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who looks on the Son and believes in him should have eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.”

John 3:36​

Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life; whoever does not obey the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God remains on him.

The bible is full of this type of choosing language it has to be explained away by those opposed to free-wiil choice because on the face of it it strongly implies choice.

 

[CrowCross]

Yes, he did. He also chose Judas and as we see one can reject His choosing. God chose Israel, it was a chosen nation and yet it rejected God for idols. Saul was chosen to be king of Isreal and yet ended u resisting God and turning to a witch for counsel. The bible has many who were chosen and yet abandoned their choosing.

He choose Paul....who hunted christians and killed them.

Knocked him off of his horse...blinded him....and saved Paul in the same moment.

 

[CrowCross]

There is no road to salvation if it is all pre-determined. The only difference between our beliefs is that I believe everything is done for us with our consent.

I agree...once you're saved, you freely consent.

Can you show me a verse that says you choose Jesus and it's you who decides to get saved?

It's what you preach...tell people...so, where is the scripture?

 

[Arial]

John 3:16​

“For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.

John 3:15​

that whoever believes in him may have eternal life.

John 11:25-26​

Jesus said to her, “I am the resurrection and the life. Whoever believes in me, though he die, yet shall he live, and everyone who lives and believes in me shall never die. Do you believe this?”

John 6:40​

For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who looks on the Son and believes in him should have eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.”

John 3:36​

Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life; whoever does not obey the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God remains on him.

Where is the word or implication of choice? Only those who believe have eternal life. A fact. Whoever and everyone don't mean anyone who wants to. The critical word here is believes---not whoever. And while I am here, you never have addressed my statement that if we choose something it is because we believe it. We do not choose something and then believe it. And if we believe something we don't reject it---otherwise it would not be believing it. We don't reject what we believe. I have to ask, what are you so afraid of?

The bible is full of this type of choosing language it has to be explained away by those opposed to free-wiil choice because on the face of it it strongly implies choice.

It isn't choosing language though. It is factual language. You began, I imagine, under the teaching that we do the choosing, as was I, and now you are unable to see these scriptures any other way. But the implication of choosing is absolutely not there. It is in your mind. In order to know which it is, we need to look at other scriptures, many of which I have given you, so won't do it again. You still refused to accept what was right in front of your eyes. But from now on, just as an exercise, take note of how frequently the apostles refer to believers as the "elect", or "the called," or the "chosen". Remember too Jesus own words, "Many are called, but few are chosen." and try your best to try and warp the meaning of His words so that they will fit what you believe. I have always wondered why so many have so much trouble with this, even after they have been a Christian for years and surely by now are confident that they believe in the biblical person and work of Christ. And I have wondered why the pursuit is not to know the truth whether they like it or not, a willingness to submit even to what they don't like. But prefer instead to arrive at a place that is comfortable and where they feel good, and sit there, fight tooth and nail to stay there if they hear something they don't like.

 

[Arial]

Not at all. God can create sentient free-will creatures for himself if He pleases and if it pleases Himself to allow them to choose good or evil who are we to say He can't?

Of course He can. That is not the question. The question is did he? Does He say He did?

The ultimate question is why did he create beings who would sin only to pour Grace into some of them without their consent and leave others to sie in misery without out lifting a finger to save them? Unless He didn't.

That is not the ultimate question. That is questioning God. He says He made of the same lump some for honor and some for dishonor. Some to receive mercy and some to receive wrath. That is what HE said. He says He knew who He created to give to His Son before the world was ever made, that He predestined them to come to Christ so the most certainly do, because according to Him, He calls them, and glorifies them. According to Jesus, He gives them to Him. Want the scriptures or do you know them? We have to go by what He says, not by what we want Him to be, or who we think He is. We go by what He says.

And perhaps His purpose is a free-will creation worshiping Him as an unfettered choice.

That would need to be backed up by scripture and not simply by proof texts. Any proof texts you give me to support that theory, I will be able to put it into its context and the context of the whole counsel of God on the subject, and show that no, it does not mean what you say it does. And lest you call that hubris, I know I will be able to do this, no matter how long or arduous the task, because the Bible never says that was His purpose. We see what His purpose is by what happens or what He says is going to happen.

 

[Arial]

He can also grant free-will to whomever He chooses.

But did He?

Pharaoh would have fulfilled the purpose of God either way. If He had softened his heart and let Israel go He would have glorified God.

Coulda, woulda, shoulda, is not how we find the meaning of Scripture.

Is God's hardening and softening in this case active or passive?

Does it matter? He says He hardened Pharoahs heart. No doubt he was doing as he pleased but God said what He said.

Should God appear to us as He is would we not perish instantly, slain by the brightness of His glory? This would be a passive result of being in His presence. Likewise, God hardens certain people. Just the God-principles harden their hearts whereas others have hearts more like wax; they soften and melt beneath His glory.

We all have hard hearts. God is the one that gives us a new heart and there is nothing passive about it. And if some have hard hearts and some

have wax hears---who did that? You have talked your way into a box because if we go with that, then God gives some people harder hearts than others and by golly that ain't fair! Or else some people are just better and smarter than others---and who did that?!

Then Paul turns to a question about what God is doing with those vessels He prepared for destruction. What if God wants to show His anger and power to them but is being patient instead? Paul seems to be referring to those who won't accept God's mercy, ending up separated from Him in hell. This raises a theological debate: Is God waiting for them to be destroyed, or is He giving them time to repent and become vessels of mercy?

This and the rest of your post I will have to get to later. No time. No energy for it at the moment. If I forget, remind me.

 

[Mercy_Shown]

But did He?

The whosoever believeth in me... Yes. Whosoever, not the pre-determined few.

Coulda, woulda, shoulda, is not how we find the meaning of Scripture.

Sometimes it is the best way. What we mustn't do is think we have it right and everyone else is wrong.

Does it matter? He says He hardened Pharoahs heart. No doubt he was doing as he pleased but God said what He said.

Passively or actively?

We all have hard hearts. God is the one that gives us a new heart and there is nothing passive about it. And if some have hard hearts and some

Giving implies choice. One gives and one receives or does not but to those who did receive him he gave...

have wax hears---who did that? You have talked your way into a box because if we go with that, then God gives some people harder hearts than others and by golly that ain't fair! Or else some people are just better and smarter than others---and who did that?!

No God did not pass out the hearts of men. Man influences the formation of the hearts of their kids. I had some students who came to our school who were adopted as toddlers from Eastern Europe and who had grown up in an orphanage where they were never held or cuddled as babies. The first real consistent contact they had was with their American adoptive parents. By the 5th grade, all kinds of problems had cropped up. They showed positive emotions when interacting with others. They Avoid eye contact and physical touch. They express fear or anger by throwing tantrums or frequently showing unhappiness or sadness. They were controlling with anything or anyone who would be controlled.

For better or for worse God gives children to their parents who can sometime mess them up very badly. But you can't blame God for that.

This and the rest of your post I will have to get to later. No time. No energy for it at the moment. If I forget, remind me.

 

[Mercy_Shown]

Of course He can. That is not the question. The question is did he? Does He say He did?

Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me. I would say, absolutely.

That is not the ultimate question. That is questioning God. He says He made of the same lump some for honor and some for dishonor. Some to receive mercy and some to receive wrath. That is what HE said. He says He knew who He created to give to His Son before the world was ever made, that He predestined them to come to Christ so the most certainly do, because according to Him, He calls them, and glorifies them. According to Jesus, He gives them to Him. Want the scriptures or do you know them? We have to go by what He says, not by what we want Him to be, or who we think He is. We go by what He says.

Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for special purposes and some for common use?

Yes, he does. But does He?

That would need to be backed up by scripture and not simply by proof texts. Any proof texts you give me to support that theory, I will be able to put it into its context and the context of the whole counsel of God on the subject, and show that no, it does not mean what you say it does. And lest you call that hubris, I know I will be able to do this, no matter how long or arduous the task, because the Bible never says that was His purpose. We see what His purpose is by what happens or what He says is going to happen.

Context can often be colored by bias and anyone can sidestep the word by calling it a proof text. I could start doing that also but it would not be productive.

 

[Mercy_Shown]

Where is the word or implication of choice? Only those who believe have eternal life. A fact. Whoever and everyone don't mean anyone who wants to. The critical word here is believes---not whoever. And while I am here, you never have addressed my statement that if we choose something it is because we believe it. We do not choose something and then believe it. And if we believe something we don't reject it---otherwise it would not be believing it. We don't reject what we believe. I have to ask, what are you so afraid of?

You are assuming facts about me, not good. The implication of choice is "whoever" not "those I predecided for." Belief can be a choice i.e. The father with the possessed son said, "I believe, help thou my unbelief"

Even the disciples chose not to believe.
Mark 16:14
Later Jesus appeared to the Eleven as they were eating; he rebuked them for their lack of faith and their stubborn refusal to believe those who had seen him after he had risen.

It isn't choosing language though. It is factual language. You began, I imagine, under the teaching that we do the choosing, as was I, and now you are unable to see these scriptures any other way. But the implication of choosing is absolutely not there. It is in your mind. In order to know which it is, we need to look at other scriptures, many of which I have given you, so won't do it again. You still refused to accept what was right in front of your eyes. But from now on, just as an exercise, take note of how frequently the apostles refer to believers as the "elect", or "the called," or the "chosen". Remember too Jesus own words, "Many are called, but few are chosen." and try your best to try and warp the meaning of His words so that they will fit what you believe. I have always wondered why so many have so much trouble with this, even after they have been a Christian for years and surely by now are confident that they believe in the biblical person and work of Christ. And I have wondered why the pursuit is not to know the truth whether they like it or not, a willingness to submit even to what they don't like. But prefer instead to arrive at a place that is comfortable and where they feel good, and sit there, fight tooth and nail to stay there if they hear something they don't like.

It is not that we do the choosing because we can't we are dead in our sins and trespasses. But what is impossible for man is possible with God. In Adam all died but in Christ shall all be made alive and once alive they can choose to remain in Christ or return to their old ways.

 

[DialecticSkeptic]

Oh come on. Look up condescending and see if the definition doesn’t fit. I should save this post and put it in my scrapbook of irony. Anyway, this is getting silly and pointless.

So, I had posed a very specific question to this forum, which was essentially this:

• If Christ died for the sins of every single person, then why do unbelievers end up enduring the punishment of hell?

If Christ bore upon the cross the penalty for all the sins of unbelievers, then there would be no penalty for them to bear—right? After all, the currency of the cross was sufficient to cover the debt owed by their guilt (expiation) and satisfy God's just wrath (propitiation), which is what 1 John 2:2 reveals, for example. "It is finished," he cried out. His atoning sacrifice was not deficient in any way.

And yet unbelievers do end up enduring the punishment of hell. Why?

"Although Christ paid their debt," many Christians will reply, "they still have to accept it." But that logic just doesn't hold up. Let us suppose that I owe my father $1,000, and let's also suppose that my brother voluntarily took the debt as his own and then paid it in full. (Please observe that it wasn't something he offered, but rather something he did. Look at the language of 1 John 2:2 and notice that it doesn't say Christ "could be" the atoning sacrifice for sins. The atonement was accomplished.)

Given this scenario, what if I don't accept what my brother did? Does my refusal to accept it change any of the facts? No, it does not. Even if I don't accept it, he nevertheless took the debt as his own and discharged it. That debt is no longer mine or even exists.

"Well, by not accepting it," one might say, "you are effectively insisting that you pay it yourself." But, once again, the logic just doesn't hold. If I went to my father and handed him $1,000, he would rightfully ask, "What's this for?"

"My debt," I would reply.

"What debt?" he would ask. "You don't owe me anything. I mean, your brother did, but he paid it completely."

How can I owe a debt that I don't have and doesn't even exist?

None of this makes any sense unless I still have a debt of some kind. And I still have a debt of some kind only if my brother didn't take it as his own and discharge it, or if he assumed only a portion of the debt and discharged that, leaving the rest in my name and still owing. Is there anyone for whom Christ did not die? No, we are told that he died for every single person. Then he must have assumed and discharged only a portion of everyone's debt—in which case everyone is in very grave trouble, believers included, because we still have some sins on the books which remain ours and unpaid.

Now, along comes a forum member, @Mercy_Shown—someone who believes that Jesus died for every single person—who tells us that unbelievers endure the punishment of hell not for their sins, because Jesus paid for those on the cross, but rather for having loved the darkness more than the light.

"But that is sin," I replied (here), because loving darkness more than light disobeys not only the gospel of our Lord Jesus (2 Thess 1:8) but also fundamentally the greatest commandment, and disobeying God is sin, by definition. This is why Paul can identify light as a metaphor for righteousness—after all, "God is light" (1 John 1:5)—and darkness as a metaphor for lawlessness (i.e., sin). He also tells us that with flaming fire God will mete out punishment on those who are guilty of sin. (But if Christ is the atoning sacrifice for the sins of every single person without exception, then is anyone guilty of sin?)

All of this is contrary to what @Mercy_Shown has been arguing up to this point, and it also sets up a glaring contradiction. Unbelievers endure the punishment of hell because they loved darkness more than light, which is a sin. And yet Christ died for all the sins of unbelievers, including this one—right? Yes, he tells us.

Wait, then why do they endure the punishment of hell?

We are right back at square one. @Mercy_Shown has not actually answered the question yet, but his beliefs have certainly amplified why it's such a difficult question for those committed to the idea that Christ died for all the sins of every single person. Maybe he could try arguing that loving darkness more than light doesn't disobey the gospel of our Lord Jesus and doesn't disobey the greatest commandment (and therefore isn't a sin), but I just can't see that meeting with any success. Or perhaps he could try arguing that hell is not punishment, but that might be even less successful.

We are left with the question that was posed at the very beginning, still needing an answer:

• If Christ died for the sins of every single person, then why do unbelievers end up enduring the punishment of hell?

If their wicked deeds, evil thoughts, shameful lusts, love of darkness, and unbelief are all sin—and they are—and if Christ fully paid the penalty for all their sin, such that his atoning sacrifice removed their guilt and satisfied God's just wrath—which @Mercy_Shown believes—then why are unbelievers enduring the punishment of hell?

 

[DialecticSkeptic]

The "whosoever believeth in me," yes. Whosoever, not the pre-determined few.

It is absolutely true that "whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life."

The question is, "Who believes?"

Scriptures say his elect or sheep (John 10:26; Acts 13:48). They are the ones who believe and, indeed, they shall not perish but have eternal life.

 

[Arial]

The implication of choice is "whoever" not "those I predecided for." Belief can be a choice i.e. The father with the possessed son said, "I believe, help thou my unbelief"

I never said the "whoever" means "those I predecided for." I simply pointed out that the scripture did not say or imply choice but was stating a fact. It could be worded as to what it is in this way. "Those who believe are the ones who have eternal life." That does not change the meaning of the sentence, but it removes the ability to read choice into it. And even you agree that those who believe have eternal life. The "whoever" also indicates that it is not restricted to only Jews or any other ethnicity, nation, class, etc.

Using the example that you do to show that belief can be a choice does not show any such thing. It is an expression of doubt we all sometimes experience in the face of the evidence before us---in this case evidence of possession.

Even the disciples chose not to believe.
Mark 16:14
Later Jesus appeared to the Eleven as they were eating; he rebuked them for their lack of faith and their stubborn refusal to believe those who had seen him after he had risen.

Their unbelief was not in Him but in what the women said. And remember, the disciples, as long as Jesus was present had not yet had a lot of things revealed to them, as they had not yet been fulfilled.

 

[Mercy_Shown]

It is absolutely true that "whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life."

The question is, "Who believes?"

Scriptures say his elect or sheep (John 10:26; Acts 13:48). They are the ones who believe and, indeed, they shall not perish but have eternal life.

Because they code to submit to the convictions of the Holy Spirit.

 

[Mr GLee]

You are assuming facts about me, not good. The implication of choice is "whoever" not "those I predecided for." Belief can be a choice i.e. The father with the possessed son said, "I believe, help thou my unbelief"

Even the disciples chose not to believe.
Mark 16:14
Later Jesus appeared to the Eleven as they were eating; he rebuked them for their lack of faith and their stubborn refusal to believe those who had seen him after he had risen.

Believers are called of "little faith" (5 times) The golden measure he gives to all (a unknown) Enough to empower the believers to both hear and do the His good will.

.He is the storeroom of faith His barn is always full .

The Faithful Creator who said "Let there be" and there the substance kind of faith "it was God alone good.".

Yes he rebuked them for thier lack of faith not obeying the truth .Not no faith "unbelief". But our new born again faith as that which can empower us to do his will .Beforehand, dead faith ,deader than a doornail . .no power

When challenging all of the apostles who knew Christ is the source of the little faith that worked in them, they asked to increase the little faith they did have

It's not about dead human faith (belief ) , powerless But a living faith that can move mountain "Let it be moved" and "it was"

.Luke 17:4-6King James Version4 And if he trespass against thee seven times in a day, and seven times in a day turn again to thee, saying, I repent; thou shalt forgive him. And the apostles said unto the Lord, Increase our faith. And the Lord said, If ye had faith as a grain of mustard seed, ye might say unto this sycamine tree, Be thou plucked up by the root, and be thou planted in the sea; and it should obey you.

"Let it be plucked up and "it was"

I would offer the Bible is a work of Christ's faith or a labor of His love, Its let there be moved men to record his thoughts and ways .It as a living word can create a new born again heart mind and soul, and a living hope beyond the grave

 

[Arial]

Because they code to submit to the convictions of the Holy Spirit.

That is a conclusion unsupported by the text itself.

 

[Arial]

This passage talks about some deep stuff, making it tough not just to understand but also to translate into English. Before this part, Paul explained how God can do whatever He wants with people, just like a potter shaping clay into different kinds of pots. This implies that God, as the creator, has full authority over His creation.

The passage referred to is Romans 9:22-24 What if God, desiring to show his wrath and to make known his power, had endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, in order to make known the riches of his glory for vessels of mercy, which he has prepared beforehand for glory---even us who he has called, not from the Jews only but also from the Gentiles. It is not so difficult to understand or translate into English. What is difficult is trying to somehow make it mean what you already believe concerning free will, and God subjecting himself to man's will when it comes to who Jesus died for. Lets see how you do this and if it will hold water or be a bucket full of holes. The passages referred to as being before this are: 14-18.


What shall we say then? Is there injustice on God's part" By no means! For he says to Moses, "I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion." So then it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God who has mercy. For the Scripture says to Pharoah, "For this very purpose I have raised you up, that I might show my power in you, and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth." So then he has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills.

This does not imply that God has full authority over His creation to do as He pleases. God says that He does. ANd Paul says that for any to say this in injustice on God's part. In verse 19 he says You will say to me then, "Why does he still find fault? For who can resist his will?" 20. But who are you, O man, to answer back to God" WIll what is molded say to its molder, "Why have you made me like this?" 21. Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for dishonorable use?

Sound familiar?

Then Paul turns to a question about what God is doing with those vessels He prepared for destruction. What if God wants to show His anger and power to them but is being patient instead? Paul seems to be referring to those who won't accept God's mercy, ending up separated from Him in hell. This raises a theological debate: Is God waiting for them to be destroyed, or is He giving them time to repent and become vessels of mercy?

We must go back to the beginning of the chapter and see what Paul is talking about and therefore what prompted what we have just seen. The scriptures being used to show the sovereignty of God in all He does, even in those He saves, begin with a lament by Paul for his fellow Jews. Israel in the old covenant had the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the law, and worship and promises, the patriarchs, and from them came Christ. (1-5) And yet it did not save them unto eternal life, and it could have if they performed perfect righteousness and from faith, but it was not intended to. (Gal 3:15-29)

In Romans 9:6-13 Paul show that salvation unto eternal life is not through geo/political Israel but through the faith of Abraham. Children of the promise. To Jews this was unthinkable and unjust. The patience is the same as we see in Gal. It is with disobedient Israel, but instead of destroying them He continues unfazed with His plan of bringing salvation to all vessels of His mercy in all nations. And who are they?Those He has called. If God is the one fashioning the vessels for destruction and the vessels of mercy, the vessels of mercy themselves do not decide to become vessels of mercy. There is no theological debate as to whether God is waiting so as to give them time to become vessels of mercy. They already either are or aren't.

I have to shorten the post by breaking it up so will end this one here and take up the rest separately. Besides. Battery red lining.