|
|
USER COMMENTS BY WEAPON OF MASS INSTRUCTION |
|
|
Page 1 | Page 17 · Found: 384 user comments posted recently. |
| | | |
|
|
10/20/07 11:36 AM |
Weapon of Mass Instruction | | Dehvastating Truth | | | |
|
Add new comment Reply to comment Report abuse
|
CBC preacher Response #173. THE ELECTION OF ISAAC OVER ISHMAEL DOES NOT TEACH UNCONDITIONAL ELECTION BECAUSE THE BIBLE DOES NOT INDICATE THAT ISAAC WAS CHOSEN UNTO ETERNAL LIFE AND ISHMAEL REJECTED UNTO ETERNAL DAMNATION. If the purpose of Romans 9:6-9 (Isaac and Ishmael) was to teach unconditional election than it would mean that Ishmael did not inherit eternal life. The Bible does not indicate this. In contrast it indicates that Ishmael attained eternal life just like Isaac, the difference is that Isaac was chosen to be the next heir of the covenant blessings.
Genesis 17 wrote: (18) And Abraham said unto God, O that Ishmael might live before thee! (19) And God said, Sarah thy wife shall bear thee a son indeed; and thou shalt call his name Isaac: and I will establish my covenant with him for an everlasting covenant, [and] with his seed after him. (20) And as for Ishmael, I have heard thee: Behold, I have blessed him, and will make him fruitful, and will multiply him exceedingly; twelve princes shall he beget, and I will make him a great nation. Here we see that Abraham requested that Ishmael would live before God. God responded with, “I have heard thee.” This final point demonstrates... |
|
|
10/20/07 12:51 AM |
Weapon of Mass Instruction | | Independent Baptist Church | | | |
|
Add new comment Reply to comment Report abuse
|
CBC preacher Response #16 Continuing…
Galatians 4: wrote: (27) For it is written, Rejoice, [thou] barren that bearest not; break forth and cry, thou that travailest not: for the desolate hath many more children than she which hath an husband. (28) Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise. (29) But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him [that was born] after the Spirit, even so [it is] now. (30) Nevertheless what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman. (31) So then, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman, but of the free. The purpose for Paul using this story here is to teach the Galatians that since they are children of the promise (like Isaac) then they are under a new Covenant which makes them free from the Covenant of the law. Is there unconditional election here? No! |
|
|
10/20/07 12:46 AM |
Weapon of Mass Instruction | | Dehvastating Truth | | | |
|
Add new comment Reply to comment Report abuse
|
2. THE ELECTION OF ISAAC OVER ISHMAEL DOES NOT TEACH UNCONDITIONAL ELECTION BECAUSE PAUL NEVER USES THAT STORY TO TEACH UNCONDITIONAL ELECTION IN ANY OTHER INSTANCE. If CBCpreacher could have gone to another passage of scripture that uses the same illustration and that teaches unconditional election, then he would have a good argument for deducting unconditional election out of Romans 9:6-9. But the only other time the story of Isaac and Ishmael is told is in Galatian 4 and even here it does not speak of unconditional election: Galatinas 4: wrote: Tell me, ye that desire to be under the law, do ye not hear the law? (22) For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman. (23) But he [who was] of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman [was] by promise. (24) Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar. (25) For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children. (26) But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all. |
|
|
10/20/07 12:30 AM |
Weapon of Mass Instruction | | Dehvastating Truth | | | |
|
Add new comment Reply to comment Report abuse
|
CBC preacher Response #12
Romans 4: wrote: “9) [Cometh] this blessedness then upon the circumcision [only], or upon the uncircumcision also? for we say that faith was reckoned to Abraham for righteousness. (10) How was it then reckoned? when he was in circumcision, or in uncircumcision? Not in circumcision, but in uncircumcision. (11) And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which [he had yet] being uncircumcised: that he might be the father of all them that believe, though they be not circumcised; that righteousness might be imputed unto them also: (12) And the father of circumcision to them who are not of the circumcision only, but who also walk in the steps of that faith of our father Abraham, which [he had] being [yet] uncircumcised. (13) For the promise, that he should be the heir of the world, [was] not to Abraham, or to his seed, through the law, but through the righteousness of faith….(16) THEREFORE [IT IS] OF FAITH, THAT [IT MIGHT BE] BY GRACE; TO THE END THE PROMISE MIGHT BE SURE TO ALL THE SEED; NOT TO THAT ONLY WHICH IS OF THE LAW, BUT TO THAT ALSO WHICH IS OF THE FAITH OF ABRAHAM; WHO IS THE FATHER OF US ALL, (17) (As it is written, I have made thee a father of many nations,) [Notice the word nation: I |
|
|
10/19/07 8:35 PM |
Weapon of Mass Instruction | | Dehvastating Truth | | | |
|
Add new comment Reply to comment Report abuse
|
CBC preacher Response #8iv. And we can go even further into the remote context to see this theme.
Acts 10:45 wrote: And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost. Acts 11:1 wrote: And the apostles and brethren that were in Judaea heard that the Gentiles had also received the word of God. Acts 11:18 wrote: When they heard these things, they held their peace, and glorified God, saying, Then hath God also to the Gentiles granted repentance unto life. Acts13:46 wrote: Then Paul and Barnabas waxed bold, and said, It was necessary that the word of God should first have been spoken to you: but seeing ye put it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles. I can go on. But if anything one can see that this thing about the Gentiles receiving the Lord was a big deal to the Jews. It was necessary in Paul’s explication of salvation that he should answer such a question. |
|
|
10/19/07 7:10 PM |
Weapon of Mass Instruction | | Dehvastating Truth | | | |
|
Add new comment Reply to comment Report abuse
|
CBC preacher Response #7a. In the remote context Paul continues the theme in his parenthetical argument (Romans 9-11) i. In Romans 10 Paul states that he desires that his brethren, the Israelites, would be saved. He gives a reason why they are not and surprisingly to the Calvinist, he does not mention unconditional election as one of those reason. On the contrary he blames their free will. And guess what: instead of contrasting the rejection of the nonelect to the acceptance of the elect, He once again contrast’s Israel’s rejection with the Gentiles acceptance: Romans 8:19 wrote: 19But I say, Did not Israel know? First Moses saith, I will provoke you to jealousy by them that are no people, and by a foolish nation I will anger you. ii. In Romans 11 he continues the same theme of Gentiles vs Jews. He compares the temporary casting away of the Jews with the reception of the Gentiles. iii. We can even go further into the remote context. In the whole book of Romans one sees this theme of Gentiles vs. Jews.
Romans 2:9-10 wrote: “Tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile;” But glory, honour, and peace, to every man that worketh good, t |
|
|
10/19/07 7:00 PM |
Weapon of Mass Instruction | | Dehvastating Truth | | | |
|
Add new comment Reply to comment Report abuse
|
CBC preacher Response #6He contrast’s Israel’s rejection of the Gospel(Romans 9:1-3) with the Gentiles acceptance (Romans 9:25-26). You see this in Acts 13:46
Acts 13:46 wrote: “Then Paul and Barnabas waxed bold, and said, It was necessary that the word of God should first have been spoken to you: but seeing ye put it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles.” The dehvastating truth is that if Paul was making a distinction between the elect and the nonelected, he would had simply stated it. Unfortunately he does not. In contrast as seen in his conclusion and developed in the Romans 9, he makes the comparison between Gentile and Jew. If CBCpreacher is going to be consistent with his analysis and the development of Romans 9, then he would have to conclude that the elect are the Jews and the nonelect are the Gentiles. Of course, he would not accept this since he is a Gentile and considers himself one of the elect. He is left with minimizing his inconsistency in his hermeneutic. The fact is that Paul did not state that only those that are elect can be saved. CBCpreacher can only come to this conclusion purely from deductive reasoning, but not from any clear statement. In fact not only c |
|
|
10/19/07 6:50 PM |
Weapon of Mass Instruction | | Independent Baptist Church | | | |
|
Add new comment Reply to comment Report abuse
|
CBC preacher Response #5Now the fact that there is a dominant distinction between Gentile and Jew in Romans 9-11 is important to note, especially knowing that the Jewish error has always been thinking that by consequence of their race, they are automatically partakers of eternal life. The Jewish question could not had been the question of the elect verses the nonelected, for they thought that all Jews were saved. The question was why did God choose the Gentiles over the nation of Israel? So to insist that the theme of Romans 9 is to demonstrate the truths of unconditional election not only forces the Jews to be concerned about something that they would never otherwise be concerned about, but also, it would completely contradict the prevailing problem of the Jews which is agreed upon by theologians from both sides of the aisle, viz. that all Jews are saved. This theme can be seen not only in the immediate context, but also in the remote context. In the immediate context he gives his thesis which to us westerners it is the conclusion:
Romans 9:30 wrote: 30What shall we say then? That the Gentiles, which followed not after righteousness, have attained to righteousness, even the righteousness which is of faith. 31But Israel, which followed after the |
|
|
10/19/07 6:42 PM |
Weapon of Mass Instruction | | Dehvastating Truth | | | |
|
Add new comment Reply to comment Report abuse
|
CBC preacher Response #4 John Gill in his “Commentary on The Whole Bible” wrote: The apostle having discoursed of justification and sanctification, and of the privileges of justified and sanctified ones, proceeds to treat of predestination, the source and spring of all the blessings of grace; and to observe how this distinguishing act of God's sovereign will has taken place, both among Jews and Gentiles; in treating of which, he knew he should go contrary to the sense of his countrymen the Jews, who have a notion that all Israel shall have a part in, or inherit the world to come {q}: and that the Gentiles will be for ever miserable… Now John Gill’s quote is even especially interesting because, although we defer in our view of election, he, as a well-respected reformed theologian within Reformed Theology, nevertheless supports the proposition that those in SA find hard to swallow: viz. that Romans 9 is making a comparison between Gentiles vs. Jews. Out of all the vehement objections made to such a clear and obvious truth, here we have one of their own making the same confession. I doubt that he would receive such a fiery objection though.Sorry CBCpreacher, but even your own Reformed theologians have a hard time with your analysis. |
|
|
10/19/07 6:28 PM |
Weapon of Mass Instruction | | Dehvastating Truth | | | |
|
Add new comment Reply to comment Report abuse
|
CBC preacher Response #3
CBCpreacher wrote: He is clearly pointing out the "spiritual" children of Abraham, as opposed to the physical descendants. Actually he is clearly pointing out the difference between physical Gentiles and Israelites. There are a few reasons for this.1. Firstly, that is the thematic material not only within the immediate context, but also in the remote context. All major theologians agree at least that Paul is answering a Jewish question concerning the Gentiles in his parenthetical thesis in Romans 9-11. John Calvin in his “Commentary on Romans” wrote: It so happened in this way, — Having finished the doctrine he discussed, he turned his attention to the Jews, and being astonished at their unbelief as at something monstrous, he burst forth into this sudden protestation, in the same way as though it was a subject which he had previously handled; for there was no one to whom this thought would not of itself immediately occur, — “If this be the doctrine of the law and the Prophets, how comes it that the Jews so pertinaciously reject it?” |
|
|
10/19/07 6:21 PM |
Weapon of Mass Instruction | | Dehvastating Truth | | | |
|
Add new comment Reply to comment Report abuse
|
CBC preacher Response #1
CBCpreacher wrote: Yamil, I will get us started on Romans 9. Verses 6 and 7 state where Paul is going with this text, "Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel:Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called." He is clearly pointing out the "spiritual" children of Abraham, as opposed to the physical descendants. Who are the "spiritual children"? We see the answer to that in verses 24-26. The quote from Hosea speaks not only of the Jews, but Gentiles who belong to the family of God. Now, we have in the middle of this text the verses refering to unconditional election ("For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth"). You can give this section no other name but "unconditional election". The verses before it speak of salvation, the verses after it speak of salvation. Why should the verses in the middle be any different? Paul then uses verses 14-23 to give examples of this truth and to prepare for the response of the nay-sayers. … |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|