|
Post by lindar on Jul 28, 2013 0:51:34 GMT 3
Why do Calvinists use Romans 9:6 when trying to "proof text" unconditional election? In attempting to define biblical "election" on another forum board, Romans 9:6 was "tossed out" as well as Galatians 3:28-29:
"To say the Jews/national Israel are the only elect of God is in error. That was my point.
There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise. Galatians 3:28, 29
Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel (romans 9:6)"
This particular Calvinist is arguing against Israel being God's elect nation...and she is "pushing" that election is only "to salvation"
Galatians 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.
Galatians 3:29 And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.
Any thoughts?
|
|
|
Post by Dr James Ach on Jul 28, 2013 9:02:24 GMT 3
Yes! Notice it does not say they are not all of Israel that are IN Israel, it says OF Israel which means not all who were from Jacob (Israel) were the children of the promises that would be inherited to Abraham's seed. If they read Romans 9 properly verses 2-8 tell you exactly who they are talking about. That just because, for example, Hagar had a child with Abraham doesn't mean Ishmael inherited the promises because "They (Ishmael, Esau) are not all Israel, which are OF Israel". This was said by Paul to rebut the Jews' assumption that they could reject Christ and still be saved because they "had their father Abraham" to look to. Matthew 3:9, John 8:39.
The church has inherited the spiritual blessings of Israel, and that is what Galations 3 is referring to. But the physical blessings and land promise that was given by birthright to Ephraim in Genesis 38-39 which came through Judah (see also 1 Chron 5:1) have not been fulfilled, and that promise is the entire context of Romans 9-11 and Galations 3-4.
|
|
|
Post by lindar on Jul 28, 2013 10:22:21 GMT 3
Yes! Notice it does not say they are not all of Israel that are IN Israel, it says OF Israel which means not all who were from Jacob (Israel) were the children of the promises that would be inherited to Abraham's seed. If they read Romans 9 properly verses 2-8 tell you exactly who they are talking about. That just because, for example, Hagar had a child with Abraham doesn't mean Ishmael inherited the promises because "They (Ishmael, Esau) are not all Israel, which are OF Israel". This was said by Paul to rebut the Jews' assumption that they could reject Christ and still be saved because they "had their father Abraham" to look to. Matthew 3:9, John 8:39. The church has inherited the spiritual blessings of Israel, and that is what Galations 3 is referring to. But the physical blessings and land promise that was given by birthright to Ephraim in Genesis 38-39 which came through Judah (see also 1 Chron 5:1) have not been fulfilled, and that promise is the entire context of Romans 9-11 and Galations 3-4. I believe they (the Calvinists) read Romans 9 through the eyes of the doctrines and presuppositions of their favorite Calvinist theologians...and that is the way they interpret Scripture. They have re-written the Bible to make TULIP "fit". I have noticed that they do ALOT of quoting everything but the Bible. Do you mean Genesis 48 and 49 instead of Genesis 38 and 39? Genesis 38 is the story about Tamar and Judah and Genesis 39 is about Joseph and Potiphar's wife.
|
|
|
Post by Dr James Ach on Jul 28, 2013 15:56:21 GMT 3
Oops! Yes Gen 48-49.
|
|