Reformed-cross

I have about 12 guns in various styles..none of them have ever walked out and started shooting. The idea behind gun control is that the common citizen cannot be trusted to own a gun and not inflict harm or commit a crime or use it dangerously. So, a false and foolish reliance upon government to suppress crime, and deny guns to people arises. What happens of course is guns are now the only tool that a criminal will use, if you dis-arm the citizenry the criminal can have the power to do and take what he wants. As to children with guns. I didnt allow my kids access to the guns unless I was present. When they were in their teens they could use them if they wanted, If my son or daughter would have been irresponsible and stupid, they would have never gained access to my guns. Loaded weapons were not a part of our family, Loaded weapons were forbidden in the house. It safeguarded the handling of a firearm so that there would be no fear of picking up a firearm or working the action. Firearms were treated like a car in the sense that any mishandling of it would result in loosing the privilege of ownership. Weak parenting, undisciplined children, irresponsible use of a firearm all combine to create hazards for children and parents in the use of firearms. Always checking your action, always pointing downrange, always knowing where your muzzle is pointing, keeping the safety on until ready to shoot, are some of the necessities of gun safety, if these are too stringent or too difficult for a child or teen, that child or teen cannot handle a firearm, they might as well never ask. If adults cannot follow proper gun safety, I will not hunt with them, nor will I encourage anyone else to shoot with them. I do not need law-enforcement to live in my home to keep my family safe in the presence of a firearm, I do that very well myself. R.E.

It matters what God has spoken to you. I realize he can speak through people and does. Yet, I wonder if he has spoken to you directly? Have you a passion in your heart to serve the body of Christ? Have you a gifting that connects you to the body of Christ to teach, lead, correct, feed, confront, guide and help them? Do you also have a willingness to be hurt, maligned, slandered, spoken against, misunderstood, misrepresented, denied and even rejected by the people you seek to serve? A drama and a few sermons does not a pastoral calling make. A few folks that like your preaching is no indicator of a calling. Jim Jones, Rev Moon, Joseph Smith had folks that liked their sermons yet they were enemies to the faith. Has it been your custom to find ways to teach? Has it been your custom to seek ways to serve and mature other believers? Has it been your custom to connect with other believers to seek them out, know them, grow them, bless them, give to them? Being a pastor is a people-position it means that God is sending you to oversee and care for his chosen flock. Has God sent you to the flock? Or do you feel like going to the flock because some of the flock are appreciative of you? There is a huge difference between going because you're liked and going because God sent you. You'll have to know the difference and decide whether or not God has called you. Whatever your decision, God has a chosen calling for you, be pleased to find out what that is and honor God in it. R.E.

If only that were always true. I find that most christians don't know the difference between theological commentary and the scriptures. I know how it upsets you when I disparage that approach, but I still prefer just quoting the scriptures instead of debating theological perspectives. So many of the great Christian theologians advocated or committed murder, for example. Theology just seems so "religious". Yuck. Yod: If you view Shiloh's post charitably it is true, if you split hairs....such as saying Paul Tillich or Rudolph Bultmann's theology is man-made (errant as to orthodoxy) then I would agree with you. But, by definition theology such as systematic-theology, that is a codification topically of scripture revelation. Biblical theology is the progression of revelation bringing to light the person and plan of God through Jesus Christ. I dont think anyone is going to argue against the fact that there are aberrant theologies out there. The truth is though...its closer to home than we want to admit.. No one just quotes scripture, well some do but its pretty useless to know what they mean, most folks connect verses with other verses to come to conclusions and because we all do this, we all have our own 'theology'. Because we must interpret the scriptures to ourselves first, no-one simply reads the sacred texts, they seek to understand the texts. Understanding is personal and subjective so therefore it is also subject to misunderstanding and error. Systematics and Biblical Theologies represent the compilation of topics brought to the reader in a way that creates a context in which the subject is to be viewed. When the sum of scripture knowledge is applied to "man" or "God" what appears is an incredibly valuable compressed knowledge of the subject that is helpful when interpreting texts of scripture that are hard to understand. But even more, the systematic approach allows the author to demonstrate the wisdom and mind of God that flows from any subject. When a good theologian speaks from a systematized knowledge of scripture his chances for error are far less than those who pretend that 'they have the bible only'. Why? Because the "bible only" folks who tout "no man-made theology" will ever cross their lips have already violated their claims. They have an un-tested, un-evaluated theology that has not been scrutinized by anyone but themselves and as such (in my experience) are just as dangerous to listen to as what some call theologians-with-an-agenda. Lastly, could you name one murdering "great" theologian? Of course you must know that even if you named a thousand, that is no proof that theology is by necessity Man-made. Even if you named 10,000 great theologians that did not murder that does not prove their theology is not man-made. There is another criteria. R.E.

Hello Grandma dolittle: It sounds like you have a problem with the divinity of Jesus Christ. If you believe that scripture reveals who God is and that what is revealed about God is truth and is not contradictory, then these texts will help you see what you do not see. First off, I hope that you decide against "deciding it doesnt matter", because it matters greatly. The doctrine of the Trinity is a uniquely Christian and perfectly biblical truth where the various aspects of Jesus Christ, the Father and the Holy Spirit are understood as the right and true biblical presentation of the One True God in whom we have trusted. Eph 4:4 There is one body and one Spirit--just as you were called to the one hope that belongs to your call-- Eph 4:5 one Lord, one faith, one baptism, Eph 4:6 one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all. In numerous places the scripture places all 3 persons of the godhead next to each other as does the Ephesians texts. So also, 1Pe_1:2, 1Co_12:3-6; The scriptures make this division because the Father is not the Son, nor is the Son the Father, Yet the Spirit is also neither the Son or the Father. You also might have noticed that our Salvation is credited to the working of all three persons...Tit 3:4 But when the goodness and loving kindness of God our Savior appeared, Tit 3:5 he saved us, not because of works done by us in righteousness, but according to his own mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewal of the Holy Spirit, Tit 3:6 whom he poured out on us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior, Now let us look at each person more specificially. Jesus Christ is fully human "1Ti 2:5 For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, 1Ti 2:6 who gave himself as a ransom for all, which is the testimony given at the proper time. Jesus is fully human and it was his manhood=humanity that was crucified and given as a ransom for all. Jesus being human, fully man, suffered, was beaten, hungered, was weary, slept, was thirsty, wept and was circumcised. I didnt post all these texts, but a concordance will take you to all of these. Jesus being fully divine, meaning that he is God, not a demi-god, or an angel or a modal-god. Texts for his divinity. Isa 6:1 In the year that King Uzziah died I saw the Lord sitting upon a throne, high and lifted up; and the train of his robe filled the temple. Isa 6:2 Above him stood the seraphim. Each had six wings: with two he covered his face, and with two he covered his feet, and with two he flew. Isa 6:3 And one called to another and said: "Holy, holy, holy is the LORD of hosts; the whole earth is full of his glory!" compare this to.....Joh 12:41 Isaiah said these things because he saw his glory and spoke of him. Of course it would be good to quote the most straight forward text as to Christ's Divinity and Humanity. Joh 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. Joh 1:2 He was in the beginning with God. Joh 1:3 All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made. It is right that we honor Jesus Christ as we do God. It is right that we honor Jesus Christ because he is God. Joh 5:23 that all may honor the Son, just as they honor the Father. Whoever does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent him. These and many other scriptures that reveal to us that Jesus Christ judges people. That Jesus Christ forgives sins, That Jesus Christ is creator of all things, That Jesus Christ is King of Kings and Lord of Lords, a title that no one but the Divine Son of God could ever take upon himself. Jesus Christ bestows grace and imparts the Holy Spirit. As far as the Spirit of God, you didnt make mention so I wont delve into that now. But for brevity, this short post should point you to the two truths about Jesus Christ, that he is fully divine and fully human and we who believe the truth, worship him as the One True God -in whom dwells the fullness of the godhead bodily. R.E.

Thanks for the concern, RE, but this thread was a three year old thread resurrected by a new member. I considered the thread dead before this, but if you would like, I can split it. It is not what the OP intended, but where Barry has taken it. The OP has not been here in a very long time. Onelight: I think it should be split, thanks. R.E.

Barry: What The Historian Kelly gives in one quote he takes away with another quote. The patristics are not near so favorable to your cardinal doctrines as you presume upon us. The bible destroys them amply for us and we need not go back to Rome. The whole of Catholic apologetics takes us from the 'inch to the mile' at every assertion. We (the protestants assert) The Church does have successors.....the early fathers and believers that preached the message of the gospel. The "Mile" the Catholic apologist insists is that because there is a continuation of godly gifted men called to lead the Church....that these are Papal, infallible, and able to launch at us the Mass, Mary and works salvation. This we deny and assert that the RCC continually seeks to exert authority in matters that belong to the Spirit and the Scripture alone. You should start another thread, this is a hijacking of this thread and Im surprised we haven been censored. R.E.

Barry: So, youre taking this thread as a platform to assert the authority of the Pope? It must be true, why bring in pretended apostolic successors and pretended books unless what the Protestant Church has must be deficient in your view? The Protestants understand the 5 fold ministry of the apostles and prophets, pastors, evangelists and teachers. I do appreciate the fact that youve shifted to allow a priesthood of all believers whereas in times past the RCC burned them for seeking to obtain a bible let alone quote from one. You must have seen the light of (RCC error). But its all plain that the Pope has no authority over the Church. Maybe his own little flock, but over the Church universal. No. There is no apostolic succession. There is no authority granted to apostolic successors because they would be pretended sucessors, fakes that cannot say to own what is not available to them. If the bible were as explicit as you make it sound, there wouldnt be an argument about the Pope, but, those who read thier bibles have found that your interpretations, not the bible, that binds them to men and to traditions and authorities that are usurpers and not true pastors. Your Mass, your veneration of Mary, your angel worship, your additional books, your papal authority, your saints, your works-based salvation are all anathema. They are accursed for they are twisting of scripture, a perversion of what may be known of God. The true Church is free from your bondage, its free from the tyranny of popes and their cardinals and bishops. In the countries I go to, I preach the gospel to them that they might be delivered from the religious bondage that entraps them in RCC traditions. These ignorant religionists are no more converted to Christ than the Devil, yet because of the blindness and ignorance of the priests their flocks live in spiritual death. Praying to Mary, Praying to saints, reciting their rosary they walk straight forward into hell. It is sad to me that you chose an ex-baptist to serve as a testimony to Papal authority. You must know that the baptists by the grace and mercy of God have had the privilege of leading many tens of thousands of catholics to a living faith in Jesus Christ, renouncing the dead and fruitless living associated with the RCC. You cannot bury the error of interpretation underneath the technicalities of greek-english transliteration. Once the smoke clears the enemy of faith is once again seen. Ill end with my rebukes to the RCC with saying that this thread belonged to the origins of the New Testament, not with the origins of the RCC and the promulgation of its errant teachings. R.E.

The Church accepts homosexuality? The Church accepts gay priests? The Church is full of sins of pride, arrogance, adulteries? It is true that the true Church of Jesus Christ is imperfect and needs to be walking in all the light available from the word of God. But I do not believe for a second that the true Church is adulterous, homosexual, prideful, arrogant, wicked, loving pleasure more than loving God. These are marks of the babylonian church, the religious ones that have not washed their robes in the blood of the Lamb. The present world attacks the true believers, Satan seeks to destroy the heritage of the Lord. But simply because the true Church is tempted, attacked and some of them fail in various ways does not give us the right to equate the true bride of Christ with the nominal professors who are devoid of the Spirit. I think we all know that there is the visible professing church which is not necessarily the same as the invisible true and holy Church that God is perfecting. I refuse to connect the true wheat with the unusefulness of Tares, I will not equate a wolf and a sheep as the same animal because both are within a 'sheepfold'. Imperfect believers and moralistic unbelievers are difficult at times to distinquish but in time they are known. We cannot and do not sniff out all false professors and we do not always have a true knowledge of who are genuine believers but what I seek to refrain from doing is broad-brushing the Church which is the holy and being-perfected bride of Christ with the sins and lifestyle of the wicked. Its unrighteous judgment and its shows no depth of perception when a sheep will say to those within its own fold...."gather them together to be burned for they are all tares" Elisha said "and I, even I only, am left" God said "I have reserved 7000 who have not bowed the knee to Baal". God sees more than we do. He has more people than we think. R.E.

Fez: That is some really good teaching. Great post. I believe faith is given to us in measure as to quantity, but its power is not limited which is what I believe you expressed in the phrase R.E.

Job was faithful, so faithful that God bragged on him. Job 1:8 And the LORD said unto Satan, Hast thou considered my servant Job, that there is none like him in the earth, a perfect and an upright man, one that feareth God, and escheweth evil? Listen if God said that about any of us, we would all be eternally thankful. The best that Satan could do is claim that Job served God for mercenary reasons....."you bless him". If I read my bible right, Id say God permitted Satan to attack Job because he knew what was in Job's heart and Satan was about to find out. Job was about to find out. God was going to prove Satan wrong, that Job's worship and service was not mercenary but true and righteous. I think what the real problem is...(rhetorically speaking) that we understand his pain and boils...those things are common to us all. But what is not common to us is the kind of covenant God and Job were in. There was no New Covenant, No mediator and Christ who has brought in a better covenant and better promises and a better hope. Job had theology that didnt contain all that we know now. His friends assumed Job had sinned because...."God blesses the righteous and curses the sinful"....so...since Job was afflicted Job must have done something to cause this horrible calamity. That is why Jobs friends were on a long fishing expedition to find out just what Job did to deserve such terrible disaster. They never caught anything because Job maintained his innocence. So, if youre wondering why Job seemed busy defending his innocence and righteousness its because he couldnt find the 'key' that opened the door to such disaster. Job's theology which was the same as his friends didnt provide an answer to the hidden workings behind-the-scenes that brought on this trial. Afterwards when Job understood the 'meeting God and Satan had' and that God had power to give blessing and to take blessing, he understood the secondary causes that effected his life, but moreso he saw God in a way that he didnt understand him before. A God that does not afflict needlessly or capriciously; God permitted this thing for the purpose of demonstrating that God can build a man to withstand terrible hardship. A mans life is in God's hands and he decides when and how it shall end. When Job received his final prosperity it was because God had covenanted to bless Job and all that he had irrespective of Job's ability to understand and assertain the reasons behind God's workings. To Jobs correction his seeming attitude of "Im righteous, I deserve God to give me an account" was met with 70 some questions that called Job into account and put him to the test. Job realized his demand was unwarranted and finished with a hand over his mouth saying nothing. Again, it seems to me that God was more interested in displaying God's own working in Job's heart by permitting this terrible loss and the horrific suffering in which his sons and daughters were killed and this livestock taken. Its just as easy to conclude...."Jobs blessing from God was due to his obedience and uprightness". God gave Job temporal blessings in order to display the covenant God and Job had. We do not see overt displays of New Testament grace at this stage of Jobs book. We find Job's life condition matching the covenant blessings Job received. We later find that his life conditions didnt match the covenant promises God gave to Job. This caused Job great heartache as well, Job wasnt able to match up his life of obedience and his calamity in life. This of course led Jobs friends to argue with Job about his innocency. Remember too Job appealed directly to God for his situation and didnt get caught up with secondary causes. Satans attacks=secondary causes. Did Job have faith? Yes, plenty for the revelation and truth that was given to him at the time. R.E.

ashwise: It kind of depends what perspective you are coming from. If its mans perspective then folks will jump to the commands of Jesus. Believe, repent, come, deny, follow and such like terms. These denote the response that is expected of us from God upon hearing the gospel. To some this is all there is. To some their theology and knowledge of what the bible says is all summed up in a few imperatives and they are happy with that. If its God's perspective then folks will jump to the declarations of God. Those who are saved are Elect, those who are sanctified are chosen, those who are called have been predestinated. From this point of view human responsibility seems un-necessary or that human involvement slights the sovereignty of God. To others they hold that divine sovereignty and mans responsibility are held in a 'tension' where the two are seemingly at odds with each other, but necessary because both are biblical. To me, there is no tension. God has not created a 'strained' message or a gospel that apparently contradicts itself. No one is going to be saved unless the Father brings them to Christ. No one is going to get saved unless the Spirit does a work of regeneration in them. No one is going to be saved unless God opens their minds and hearts to the truth of Gods word whereby they are enlightened and given spiritual ears to hear the message of the Kingdom of God and spiritual eyes to see the Kingdom of God and desire that they may enter it. No one is going to be saved unless they believe the truth. No one is going to be saved unless they have repented and called upon Jesus Christ and have denied themselves this world in order to partake of the one to come. No one is a disciple that has not counted the cost, denied himself, believed and trusted in Christ to forgive their sins and indwell them with the Holy Spirit. Im saying that the bible teaches that God's sovereignty walks hand in hand with mans required responsibility to obey the command of God. Most reasonable and knowledgeable Christians admit this and have no questions at all with both of these necessary biblical perspectives. Each perspective contains abundant truth which connects it to the gospel message as a whole. The extremes of either position destroy the message of the gospel. If you lean to heavily upon God's sovereignty in which you nullify the commands to repent and believe you effectively gut the gospel of human responsibility and effectively gut the truth that men are guilty. If man is not responsible or culpable for either truth or error, righteousness or sin then it makes a mockery of the crucificiion and degrades the work of God to redeem mankind by such a cruel and terrible death of the Son of God. If you lean to heavily upon human responsibility the hidden and secret work of the Spirit is nullified. You have effectively neutered the gospel of divine origin. All becomes a work of the will and power of men to overcome self and sin which they do not have power to overcome. It destroys the foundation of the gospel, which is not predicated upon mans willing and working but upon God's love and mercies. The power of the gospel is founded upon Divine decree not human agency. To avoid those extremes we allow the scripture to speak to us simply. There are many texts that marry sovereignty and human agency. Do not divorce them. Do not set them at odds with each other. Do not favor one text of sovereignty....because...the Sovereign God has declared a man is to act and to obey. Do not favor human agency....because.... the inspired writers have declared "a man can receive nothing except it be given him from heaven". It is the interweaving of human workings and Divine workings that good scripture students can get confused or have their whole little theological world overturned. Just remember that the details on how God has brought the two together will not overthrow the main points. Human responsibility will never overturn the Divine agency and Divine agency will never overturn human responsibility. Within the human mind these two clash again and again, in God's mind they do not clash and so far from clashing, they are revealed to us within the sacred pages as the "whole" truth. R.E.

saved34: Again, there are many things we agree on and some are simply emphasis in one area or another. I know we dont see eye to eye. But allow me to say a few things. 1. I agree that Rom 11 and what happened to the Jews even while Jesus was "coming to the lost sheep of Israel" has applicability to Johns Gospel. 2. I agree that I could have mistaken your definition about corporate Election. 3. I also agree that I form a deductive argument in terms of the lost state of multitudes who have died without hearing the gospel. That conclusion does not necessarily equate to "the mind of God". Lastly. Even though there are difference of opinion I would take a thousand more just like you to fill the world with the gospel of Jesus Christ and to declare the grace and blessing within the covenant of God. Your brother and co-laborer in the harvest R.E.

As a young Christian I used to think about how strong my faith was. I had read alot of stories of Christians that in times past endured tremendous persecution and were beaten and starved to death. I thought many a time on just what I would do in the same situation. I thought I would pass in flying colors. Today after alot of years living for Christ I have come to the realization that my faith is mine only because God keeps that faith alive in me. Through all the hardships, losses, family trials and sins of my own making I dont think I have strong faith. I think I have a strong God. In my dark days a scripture came to mind again and again. With alot of tears and agonizing heart-break I would go to prayer and seek the Lord. When I prayed, (my own evaluation of my faith which I thought was really important) I found out to be insignificant. Gauging my future with my own estimation of my faith was less than useless it was vain. As I looked up to heaven I had only the feeling of distance in my heart from God. I felt beaten to a pulp and so discouraged I couldnt ever put it into words. Here's the thing, trying to explain that to someone is also less than useless. Trite answers came and they only compounded my pain. I didnt feel disappointed in my well-wishers because they didnt have what I needed. I needed God himself. Unless God poured his love into me, I wasnt going to be satisfied. What I wanted was not going to come from men in the form of advice or counsels I had to have a meeting with God, one that brought me to a decision. The scripture that I received Job 13:15 Though he slay me, yet will I trust in him: but I will maintain mine own ways before him. I resigned myself that if I was going to be ruined by the situation I was in, and that if I were to lose everything I had received of him I was going to permit him to do so. Its not as though I was actually giving God permission to do anything, but I was permitting God to do so with a heart that said "I will trust in him". I wanted my Father to know I would be willing, not just to suffer but to have a heart that will suffer out of love for him. The hardest thing that I confronted in seeking to place myself upon that altar was that as a sacrifice I was unclean. If my heart was to sacrifice itself out of love for Jesus Christ at least it could be clean and pure. Well, I didnt have any of that. Part of the reason for this terrible condition I was in was due to my own sinfulness and selfish quests. But inwardly I had a driving need to submit to God even if it meant I was to be slain. I didnt expect to be killed I expected to have my life ruined and my family turn from me and my Church get rid of me and all the future I could imagine turn very dark. I went to prayer again and again and again I poured out my heart and I seemed to double over in pain I wept as hard as I could. I wish I could say it was just a short while and all was cleared up. No, I spent about 5 years going through this. Then after a reprieve for around 5 years It seemed necessary again to spend a great deal of time with my Father in prayer. After a few more years of weeping and heart ache I emerged from it. It all came to a point where I was in prayer walking in the woods, I knelt down and told my Father "I cannot live without you, I cannot put anything before you" If you want my life, I offer it to you to do with as you please however you please, I am yours." I had said this many times before and meant it every time, but this time I received a vision. I saw a well of blood, that blood was for me to drink of. I knew that what I had seen was the unending cleansing and purifying I could receive of God through Christ. My Father had provided for me purity and cleanness and with it reconciliation. When I looked up, I looked over the top of some large Firs. Immediately I froze, I knew that I was in the presence of an Angel I could sense the Spirit of God all around me I didnt move for about 20 minutes. I wept again for joy that I was accepted by my Father, that I was loved and I belong to him. My person is not great or important or even needed, but lacking all those things I was wanted and loved and that broke my heart more than I can describe. Here's the blessing, as I prayed I knew that my Father in heaven was going to give me what I should pray about, he would show me what I needed to do, He was going to give to me what I asked and that instead of empty vain self-evaluations of myself I knew something vastly superior that I was accepted in the beloved Christ and that I was God's son. R.E.

Again, I am having a hard time following your direction of your words. Scripture clearly states in Romans 8:28-30 "And we know that all things work together for good to those who love God, to those who are the called according to His purpose. For whom He foreknew, He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brethren. Moreover whom He predestined, these He also called; whom He called, these He also justified; and whom He justified, these He also glorified." Where do you stand on the Predestination idea? I thought I knew until this post. Now I am uncertain. Hi Onelight: I appreciate the clarification on your views. You remind me of old-school Arminianism which carries alot of Calvinism in it but yet holds free-will as you do. Ya know I can be confusing to myself at times its no wonder others get confused. My take on predestination is that God by his sovereign choice before the world begain determined who he will 'put in Christ'. He destined them to salvation which is only through Jesus Christ. God not only Chose but predestined the means which is Christ and He predestined what the elect would look like and that is the image of Jesus Christ. Simply put my friend I say "A man choses Christ because God foreknew that man in love and therefore determined to adopt that man by bringing him to a place where he would believe and obey the call to repent and put faith in Jesus Christ." God ordained the means..Jesus Christ God ordained the man.....chosen, called, elect God ordained the mans preservation....justified, sanctified, preserved, protected God ordained the mans happy ending....glorified. God ordained the man everlasting happiness... Eph 2:7 That in the ages to come he might shew the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindness toward us through Christ Jesus. Hope this helps. R.E.

Saved: I offered a simply reason why you cannot equate John 6:37 with a strict "this only happend to the Jews" meaning. Its because You must take Vs 40 and do the same. You say you can have it both ways, but you cant. Exegeting the scripture as youve done is not done by any competent students of scripture. Tagging that text with the Romans text in order to narrow its scope could be valid if the context would allow it. But it doesnt. All of your rebuttals were summed up in the Romans text I gave which "show the hardening you asked for" in scripture. It was summarily dismissed. There is no such thing as corporate election for the gentiles and if you actually read the Romans text you find theres no corporate election for the Jew either. God takes his elect ones to himself out of the midst of what appears to be the visible elect tribes and makes them his own. This has been the manner all through history. Romans 11 if any text validates the Election of God for the gentile, that one does it. How, in the negative. "Israel was hardened" so God brought the Gentiles in. The Gentiles receiving the Holy Spirit was not a 'natural' occurance. It was the divine plan. How do I know? Well, read about many Gentiles being in covenant with God in the Old Testament? Yea...just about as many as Ive read...not very many. So, what happened to all those gentiles? Id say......sadly lost. If you read the text of Romans 9 you see that it was the gentile Pharaoh that was hardened...Id call him a gentile? Just sayin. So, I have scriptural precedent way up front that God hardens Gentiles and now in Romans 9 God speaking through Paul to the gentiles....."there has always been an Israel within Israel" they are the ones that God has chosen. This is the very reason Paul gives to bring understanding to the Romans "Why did the Jews who had all these promises and all the blessings, the covenant and the prophets fail here so miserably when the Messiah they were looking for finaly came? Rom 9:3 For I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh: Rom 9:4 Who are Israelites; to whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises; Rom 9:5 Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen. Rom 9:6 Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel: Paul answers himself with individual election through the remainder of the whole chapter. He never answers it with corporate election (which is a fabrication by those who dismiss the context of individual election). I realize that you would have to turn lose of corporate election...and thats ok because Saved...when you came to Christ were you 'corporately called'? I mean did just a generic call come to you or was it individual? Did you respond to a divine call that was really given to someone else but you took it cause you heard it 3rd person? Is your salvation really in-direct and 3rd hand? Allow me to speak rhetorically: maybe, just maybe you heard the word of God and responded to it because it was very directly applied to you? Maybe it was your own personal sins keeping you from a God that will not judge you corporately but will judge you individually and call you into account individually. I think probably the later. If your conversion is individual how is it that the salvation obtained is called "corporate". Did God saved me and then throw you in just for fun? Is that corporate? yea it is. I believe..and its just me...that no one believes they are corporately saved...especially those who hold to free will. That doctrine is more sacred to most than Jesus himself. So, its always a paradox to listen to those who demand free-will say "the gentiles are corporately elected". They dont believe it themselves for a second but try to put that corporate doctrine thing out as if its bible. Pardon me while I summarily dismiss corporate election. The whole New Testament is focusing on the individual believer and his responsibilities+relations to God. No one ever denies that in all the hundreds of thread on this website. But, when God is chosing one individual and hardening another....But yet some here will say "well, that cant be true cause election is corporate". I say bunk and hooey. I wont digress any farther. My conclusion is based upon the simple straight-forward interpretation of the texts in John and Romans. The narrowing of the text you do in John is eisogesis and unfortunately you think that because its connected "election-wise" to Romans 11 that God only blinds one kind of people and not the other. Yet, the text of scripture clearly states...Rom 9:15 For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion. Rom 9:16 So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy. What do you think this text means? Well, basically its God's decision on whom he will have mercy, its not because a man that wills or works that mercy is given. If you narrow the "whom" to Jews...well that would be consistent, but it would be consistently wrong. I have a whole bible containing the message that God elects some and does not elect others. Im still waiting for some biblical proof that God sent out evangelists to 'reconcile' back to himself all those multitudes who died by reason of the flood. It would be no stretch of the imagination to say that multitudes died without even the opportunity to jump on that Arc. Maybe thats too far back, how about the exterminated races that Israel took out? Did they get a chance to be in covenant with God before their demise? I dont read anywhere God gave them a chance. How about today? What has been the evangelistic push for the last 100 years? To bring the gospel and the bible to people who have never heard of Jesus Christ. Why? Because they will die in their sins without the opportunity to be saved. They are effectively lost. Yet, Im told to believe that God doesnt chose? God doesnt really leave one in their sins and bring another into glory? Using my bible as an interpreter of current events Id have to say that God really elects. Lastly, I dont disagree that Satan blinds the minds of those who do not believe. Thats scripture, but all Ive been saying is God has control over what Satan does, and if God wants to save someone Satan is not going to stop him. Thats over simplified but consistent with the biblical account of who God is. R.E.