Calvinism and Corinthians 12:3

[nebula]

But to address your other points:

I hear you, but "there is neither Jew nor Gentile. . .if you belong to Christ, you are heirs according to the promise" (Gal 3:28).

Why is it so important that they be separate, when the Word of God does not see them as separate?

The Bible says there is also "there is neither male nor female."

Does that mean that in Christ people lose their masculinity or femininity?

You may have penciled out "Israel" out of the prophetic Scriptures and penciled in "the people of God," but I don't.

Romans 11 is clear that Jews and Gentiles have unique callings. It has nothing to do with salvation. It has to do with roles within the body and with God's plan for mankind and the earth.

I don't give merit to the theologian, I give merit or demerit to his thought, based strictly on its conformity to the Word of God.

James 3:12 - Can a fig tree, my brethren, produce olives, or a vine produce figs ? Nor can salt water produce fresh. 13 Who among you is wise and understanding ? Let him show by his good behavior his deeds in the gentleness of wisdom.

Are you saying Calvin is the author of predestination?

If you are, this would be a good example of what I mean by not dealing with the clear, plain Word of God in Ro 8:29-30; Eph 1:5, 11 on predestination.

If you are not saying Calvin is the author of predestination, what is the point you are making with Jas 3:12 in regard to Calvin?

1. So why have you been defending Calvin all this time?

2. Who taught the Doctrine of Predestination before Calvin? That would be news to me.

[nebula]

Did you not condemn the Christians who murdered Jews?

I'm just pointing out the inconsistency of condemning one and not condemning the other for the same crime of murder.

The ones who "murdered Jesus" were members of the Sanhedrin.

If we were in a discussion about the Sanhedrin, I would be condemning them, same as every other Christian theologian.

Where did you come up with the notion that I have ever given the Sanhedrin a free pass?

However, by claiming "the Jews" should be condemned - that's one of the main justifications for anti-antisemitism, and I have a serious problem with that.

"The Jews who murdered Jesus" were the Sanhedrin, and I have yet to hear a sermon or teaching that mentions them which does not speak against them. So in essence, your whole argument has no merit other than to paint a target on "the Jews."

It would have been helpful then had they done that here when they spoke against the Christians who murdered Jews.

You are correct, and I wish I had considered this sooner. So I will agree I erred in my debate. But the fact that you said "the Jews" was so in our faces that we had to address this.

Predestination is consistent with the Word of God in Ro 8:29-30; Eph 1:5, 11.

Since predestintion is consistent with the Word of God, then predestination is consistent with the heart of God.

God, not human theologians, is the author of predestination.

Just to affirm again, I have no interest in arguing this. I was arguing Calvin and actions.

There is a pinned thread on the predestination- free will debate, and if you will glance at it you sill see that the debate has been going on in circles for eons. I chose a long time ago to simply get off that merry-go-round.

Both perspectives have merits and both have faults. I have become convinced that the truth is somewhere between the two, that somehow God calls yet still humans make their own choices. The Bible is full of apparent contradictions like this where there is truth found in finding unity between the two.

[Guest yod]

Was my post addresed to you?

does it matter?

Are you triangulating in my conversation with nebula?

How about dealing with your own conversation with me?

I have no idea what you're talking about?

If you don't mind, I prefer to have my and nebula's conversation with nebula.

And I await the demonstration requested in my conversation with you.

It's a public discussion board. I'll jump in where I think my input is valuable.

What demonstration are you talking about? I've already demonstrated Calvin is a murderer of anyone who disagrees with his european theology, and that you support that.

Is there something else I can help you with?

[Guest yod]

This is what Kefa says regarding who crucified the Lord:

Acts 4

⁸Then Peter, filled with the Holy Ghost, said unto them, Ye rulers of the people, and elders of Israel,

⁹If we this day be examined of the good deed done to the impotent man, by what means he is made whole;

¹⁰Be it known unto you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, whom God raised from the dead, even by him doth this man stand here before you whole.

The word "Jew" has multiple meanings like many english words also do. One of the meanings is "Leader of the people of Israel" and in most cases where you have the (jewish) Apostles speaking about "the Jews" this is the intended definition.

As mentioned already, it was a specific group of Jews (leaders of the people) who manipulated the Romans into capital punishment. Nowhere do the scriptures indict the entire jewish race. It seems like someone who is committed to the Word of God would accept what it says? Only a few verses later, Kefa gives the biblically definitive answer about who exactly killed Yeshua:

²⁷For of a truth against thy holy child Jesus, whom thou hast anointed, both Herod, and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles, and the people of Israel, were gathered together,

So the scriptures say that it was Herod (an edomite) Pontius Pilate (a Roman), the Gentiles (you!) and the people of Israel (the Jews).Looks like no one is a hero except for Yeshua, according to the scriptures.

[Guest Bro David]

But to address your other points:

I hear you, but "there is neither Jew nor Gentile. . .if you belong to Christ, you are heirs according to the promise" (Gal 3:28).

Why is it so important that they be separate, when the Word of God does not see them as separate?

The Bible says there is also "there is neither male nor female."

Does that mean that in Christ people lose their masculinity or femininity?

You may have penciled out "Israel" out of the prophetic Scriptures and penciled in "the people of God," but I don't.

As I've pointed out before, since prophecies are dark sayings, given in riddles (Nu 12:6-8), never really understood correctly by the people of God prior to their fulfullment (e.g., kingdom of Jesus as political), I don't base my understanding in them. I stick to what is plain and clear in the didactics, and require my understandings of any prophecy to be in agreement with them.

Romans 11 is clear that Jews and Gentiles have unique callings. It has nothing to do with salvation. It has to do with roles within the body and with God's plan for mankind and the earth.

You aren't saying that Ro 11 has nothing to do with salvation, right?

Paul is addressing God's sovereign choice of Israel and God's subsequent cutting off of unbelieving Israel in chps 9-11.

He shows that God's stated purpose has not failed because "not all who are descended from Israel (Esau) are Israel" (9:6),

by showing God's sovereign choice of Jacob and his rejection of Esau, before they were even born.

He is not denying the election of all Israel to fulfill the Promise of Messiah as their descendant, but is stating

that within the chosen Israel there is a separation, that of unbelieving Israel and believing Israel.

Physical descent into the chosen people of God is no guarantee of a place in God's family (salvation)--(9:8).

He then digresses to address two things: the justice of God in choosing some (Jacob) and not others (Esau), based not in anything Esau had done,

but only to fulfill his sovereign purpose in Jacob's election (9:10-21),

and to show that the reason for Israel's rejection lay in the nature of her disobedience--she failed to obey her own God-given law, which in reality was pointing to Christ.

True, she pursued the law--yet not by faith but by works., so that the real reason for Israel's rejection was her failure to believe (9:20-10:31).

Then he returns to the principle of God's choosing some and not others, and shows that God's cutting off (rejection) of unbelieving Israel is not a nullifying of God's sovereign choice of Israel, because there is a remnant at the present time who believes and belongs to God's family (salvation), whom he foreknew and has not rejected (Ro 11:1, 5).

Ro 11 is about salvation.

Paul then shows that in the midst of the rejection of unbelieving Israel, the gospel call still goes out, to Gentiles (11:11-12),

and that his hope is that "the riches for the world and the riches for the Gentiles," which refers to the abundant benefits of salvation, will cause unbelieving Israel to envy the Gentiles and choose to likewise partake of these benefits.

Ro 11 is about salvation.

And Paul holds out hope for the unbelieving Jews of being grafted back in again to the people of God (11:23), if they do not persist in unbelief (11:23).

The "calling" in Ro 11 is to the body of Christ, for both Gentile and Jew, which at the present time is being fulfilled in a remnant of Israel, but is also open to unbelieving Israel, as it is to the world, if they do not persist in unbelief.

There is no other "calling" to Israel found in Ro 11.

The "calling" to unbelieving Israel is to salvation through faith in Jesus Christ, the same as it is to the world.

God has only one "calling" and only one plan: to salvation, and through faith in Jesus Christ.

I don't give merit to the theologian, I give merit or demerit to his thought, based strictly on its conformity to the Word of God.

James 3:12 - Can a fig tree, my brethren, produce olives, or a vine produce figs ? Nor can salt water produce fresh. 13 Who among you is wise and understanding ? Let him show by his good behavior his deeds in the gentleness of wisdom.

Are you saying Calvin is the author of predestination?

If you are, this would be a good example of what I mean by not dealing with the clear, plain Word of God in Ro 8:29-30; Eph 1:5, 11 on predestination.

If you are not saying Calvin is the author of predestination, what is the point you are making with Jas 3:12 in regard to Calvin?

1. So why have you been defending Calvin all this time?

2. Who taught the Doctrine of Predestination before Calvin? That would be news to me.

The Word of God has taught the Doctrine of Predestination for over 2,000 years, in Eph 1:1, 5; Ro 8:29-30.

I think maybe Augustine explicated it before Calvin.

You misunderstand if you think I have been defending Calvin personally.

I have been defending the principle of consistency, regarding blame for the crime of murder.

And I have been defending the Word of God regarding predestination.

Neither equates to defending Calvin.

I agree with alot of the 1st replys given. We can know and understand alot but the secrete things belong to the Lord. God is Sovereign, and the foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal, the Lord knoweth them that are his. And, Let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity (2 Timothy 2:19). Our finite brains cannot fully understand the infinite workings of almighty God! (Rom 11:21-36, Heb 6:1-9). As good as some theology is it cannot save us. It is God that justifies (Rom 8:33). In looking at the Cross we see Gods will and mans see Isa 53 and as Joseph said to his brothers you meant it for evil, but God for good. His ways are higher than ours. Good theology will strive to hold a balance as Paul said God knows who is His. When I feel the enemy attacking or doubting Gods love, because of circumstances, temptations ext... I look to the Cross and see His love, then I'm comforted by His Spirit. Paul also was a great theologian and said His Spirit bears wittiness with ours that we do belong to Him and its those who are led by His Spirit who are truly his sons and daughters! Calvinism nor Armenians have the full answer, God does as we look to Him in prayer. Without faith we simply CANNOT PLEASE HIM. The Lord Bless you.

Bro David

[nebula]

Perhaps it's time to review this gloss:

Mt 27:18, 20-25 - "Pilate knew it was out of envy that they had handed him over. . .the chief priests and the elders persuaded the crowd to ask to have Jesus crucified. . .They all anwered, 'Crucify him!' 'Why, what crime has he committed?' asked Pilate. But they shouted all the louder, 'Crucify him!'. . .Pilate said, 'I am innocent of this man's blood. It is your responsibility.' All the people answered 'Let his blood be on us and on our children!' "

Well, first of all, you need to consider the factor of the persuasion by the religious leaders.

Second, how large do you suppose this crowd was?

Can you rightly say they were all the Jews? Were they even 1% of all Jews alive at that time?

Ac 2:14, 22-23 - "Fellow Jews and all of you who live in Jerusalem, listen carefully to what I say. . .Men of Israel, listen to this:

This man was handed over to you by God's set purpose and foreknowledge; and you (fellow Jews, all who live in Jerusalem, men of Israel), with the help of wicked men, put him to death by nailing him to the cross."

Will you claim that every single person in the crowd whom Peter spoke to were gathered before Pilate when Jesus was brought forth?

The word "you" can be a broad term. At times it is used to represent the people as a collective even when the individuals were not involved.

Now if you will notice, this is the only place in Scripture where it is spoken, "You put him to death". After that, it is mentioned once or twice specifically to the religious leaders. Never again is anything like this heard.

Or do you suppose Paul blamed the Jews for Christ's death in every city he went to?

But what does Paul say? "...the wisdom which none of the rulers of this age has understood ; for if they had understood it they would not have crucified the Lord of glory ;" (1 Corinthians 2:8)

Paul lays the blame on "the rulers of this age". Who do you believe the "rulers of this age" are?

I understand your problem. But the Word of God assigns the responsibility for his death to more than the Sanhedrin.

True, the murder of Jews by Christians in the past is the result of misapplication of the Word of God.

But the remedy for that is not altering the Word of God, but obeying the Word of God: love your enemies.

Telling a Jew you love him after you've called "the Jews" murderers of Christ is not going to convince them that they are loved - by you or by your God and especially not by Jesus.

You are not going to eliminate anti-semitism by trying to show the Word of God assigns responsibiliity only to the Sanhedrin for the murder of Jesus.

Rather the right application of the Word of God, as it bears on them: "Love your enemies" must be presented to those guilty of anti-semitism because of their wrong application of it.

That is the Biblical remedy, rather than the human remedy.

As I pointed out above and as Yod pointed out, the Bible lays the blame beyond the Jews and Israel.

Your "Biblical remedy" is a deceived one.

Because we really do need to get past glossing the Word of God as the remedy for anti-semitism.

In defending the Word of God against gloss, I am not defending anti-semitism.

We must distinguish between the two, if we are to have a Biblical view of this.

Treating "the Jews" with contempt is not a proper handling of the word of God.

Even if you claim you harbor no ill feelings towards them, these words sting worse than lemon juice in a paper cut to them.

Of what value or benefit is there to telling the Jews that "they" murdered Christ? Even if you say that you are not blaming the Jews alive today for this, but only the Jews in the first century, the Jews today will not receive your words. They will see you as no different than "the Christians" who killed their ancestors.

To this days the Jewish people believe "the Christians murdered the Jews."

How will you demonstrate the love of Jesus to them by laying the death of Jesus at their feet?

"Calvin's" theology of the absolute sovereignty of God in salvation was likewise being condemned because of his behavior.

Calvin murdered Christians, too, you know.

[nebula]

But to address your other points:

I hear you, but "there is neither Jew nor Gentile. . .if you belong to Christ, you are heirs according to the promise" (Gal 3:28).

Why is it so important that they be separate, when the Word of God does not see them as separate?

The Bible says there is also "there is neither male nor female."

Does that mean that in Christ people lose their masculinity or femininity?

You did not address this question.

You may have penciled out "Israel" out of the prophetic Scriptures and penciled in "the people of God," but I don't.

As I've pointed out before, since prophecies are dark sayings, given in riddles (Nu 12:6-8), never really understood correctly by the people of God prior to their fulfullment (e.g., kingdom of Jesus as political), I don't base my understanding in them. I stick to what is plain and clear in the didactics, and require my understandings of any prophecy to be in agreement with them.

But you are interpreting the prophecies through the lens of Replacement Theology.

By what Scriptural evidence to you scratch off "Israel" and pencil in "people of God" in prophecy?

The "calling" in Ro 11 is to the body of Christ, for both Gentile and Jew, which at the present time is being fulfilled in a remnant of Israel, but is also open to unbelieving Israel, as it is to the world, if they do not persist in unbelief.

There is no other "calling" to Israel found in Ro 11.

Ro 11 is about the calling to salvation.

The "calling" to unbelieving Israel is to salvation through faith in Jesus Christ, the same as it is to the world.

God has only one "calling" and only one plan: to salvation, and through faith in Jesus Christ.

Do not forget the warning:

18 do not be arrogant toward the branches ; but if you are arrogant, remember that it is not you who supports the root, but the root supports you. 19 You will say then, "Branches were broken off so that I might be grafted in." 20 Quite right, they were broken off for their unbelief, but you stand by your faith. Do not be conceited , but fear ; 21 for if God did not spare the natural branches, He will not spare you, either. 22 Behold then the kindness and severity of God ; to those who fell, severity, but to you, God's kindness, if you continue in His kindness ; otherwise you also will be cut off.

And likewise:

26 and so all Israel will be saved ; just as it is written, "THE DELIVERER WILL COME FROM ZION, HE WILL REMOVE UNGODLINESS FROM JACOB." 27 "THIS IS MY COVENANT WITH THEM, WHEN I TAKE AWAY THEIR SINS." 28 From the standpoint of the gospel they are enemies for your sake, but from the standpoint of God's choice they are beloved for the sake of the fathers ;

Do you regard the Jews, the natural branches, as "beloved"?

For he said previously:

12 Now if their transgression is riches for the world and their failure is riches for the Gentiles, how much more will their fulfillment be! 13 But I am speaking to you who are Gentiles. Inasmuch then as I am an apostle of Gentiles, I magnify my ministry, 14 if somehow I might move to jealousy my fellow countrymen and save some of them. 15 For if their rejection is the reconciliation of the world, what will their acceptance be but life from the dead ?

I ask you, how are you moving the Jews "to jealousy in order to save some of them" through insisting on holding them accountable for Christ's death?

The Word of God has taught the Doctrine of Predestination for over 2,000 years, in Eph 1:1, 5; Ro 8:29-30.

By the interpretation of Calvin. How about before then?

I think maybe Augustine explicated it before Calvin.

Do you have something more concrete?

You misunderstand if you think I have been defending Calvin personally.

I have been defending the principle of consistency, regarding blame for the crime of murder.

And I have been defending the Word of God regarding predestination.

Neither equates to defending Calvin.

Calvin killed Christians and Jews. Your defense of Calvin's doctrine has been to blame the Jews for killing Christ.

Why should anyone hold non-believers accountable for the actions of non-believers?

The fact that you want us to blame "the Jews" for killing Christ indicates that this issue is strong on your heart. Why?

When you see a Jew, do you see a rebellious, stiff-necked, broken branch, who had the blood of Christ on his head? Or do you see a lost sheep of the House of Israel?

[nebula]

How about dealing with your own conversation with me?

I have no idea what you're talking about?

From my post of 2/12/12:* "Perhaps you would like to demonstrate your point (that I continually contradict the Scriptures)

by addressing the unglossed Scriptures presented by me in my response here.

You linked to a post where you were addressing JohnDB.

[Fez]

Tell me Eleanor, in your own words, what do you feel about the Jews of today?

[mizzdy]

Tell me Eleanor, in your own words, what do you feel about the Jews of today?

My feelings for them are no different than my feelings for all unbelievers.

However, I have not been given to be an evangelist, I have been given to another service in the people of God (Eph 4:11).

Furthermore, he gave some people as emissaries, some as prophets, some as proclaimers of the Good News, and some as shepherds and teachers. Eph. 4:11

How do you witness to our brothers? How would you talk to a Jewish person, would you suggest they need to convert to christianity? would you tell them they were responsible for the 'murder' of Messiah?

I already know that you believe you are called to be a teacher, so how would you 'teach' a Jew about Messiah?