No A-Z; either 100% T or 100% F

[Mesenja]

Originally Posted by Father_JD

Sorry,Charlie. Although Jacob and Esau did indeed become fathers of "nations",the context of Romans 9 is about INDIVIDUAL ELECTION. Why do you ignore Paul's words about Moses being "elected" and Pharaoh NOT? Context defeats Mormon arguments every single time.

Lately all you have been doing is giving "nuh uh" responses. Either make a proper argument or stay home. Paul was quoting Malachi who used the names Jacob and Esau to refer to the nations of Israel and Edom.

Malachi 1:1-5

1 The burden of the word of the LORD to Israel by Malachi.
Israel Beloved of God
2 “ I have loved you,” says the LORD.

“ Yet you say, ‘In what way have You loved us?’
Was not Esau Jacob’s brother?”
Says the LORD.

“Yet Jacob I have loved;
3 But Esau I have hated,
And laid waste his mountains and his heritage
For the jackals of the wilderness.”

Romans 9:13
13 As it is written,Jacob have I loved,but Esau have I hated.

[Father_JD]

Originally Posted by Mesenja

Lately all you have been doing is giving "nuh uh" responses. Either make a proper argument or stay home. Paul was quoting Malachi who used the names Jacob and Esau to refer to the nations of Israel and Edom.

LOL. WHY wont you address the FACT that Paul specifies election of INDIVIDUALS such as Moses and NOT PHARAOH?? The CONTEXT of Romans 9 is about INDIVIDUAL ELECTION but in typical Mormon fashion you refuse to address the text in favor of some other you think proves your case.

Methinks youre the nuh uh guy here M.

[nrajeff]

Originally Posted by Father_JD

LOL. WHY wont you address the FACT that Paul specifies election of INDIVIDUALS such as Moses and NOT PHARAOH??

----Well, DUH: of COURSE Pharaoh couldn't have been elected---ancient Egypt was a dynastic monarchy, not a democracy.

[Father_JD]

Originally Posted by nrajeff

----Well, DUH: of COURSE Pharaoh couldn't have been elected---ancient Egypt was a dynastic monarchy, not a democracy.

You KNOW I like and appreciate your humor but could I get a straight "answer" once in a while, jeff?

[nrajeff]

Here is the huge error in Calvinism regarding election:

Calvinism claims that God "elects" some people and REFUSES to elect others, and that God uses no discernible rational system for deciding who gets elected and who does not.

A FAIR God would elect those who have demonstrated sufficient faith and obedience.

To LDS, God is fair. That is a big reason I believe LDS theology and reject Calvinism.

[Father_JD]

Originally Posted by nrajeff

Here is the huge error in Calvinism regarding election:

Calvinism claims that God "elects" some people and REFUSES to elect others, and that God uses no discernible rational system for deciding who gets elected and who does not.

A FAIR God would elect those who have demonstrated sufficient faith and obedience.

To LDS, God is fair. That is a big reason I believe LDS theology and reject Calvinism.

Too bad your idea of what is fair does NOT conform to scripture, jeff. God certainly has His reasons whether they are discernable to humans or not.

Please go back and read regarding the election of Jacob and NOT Esau in Romans 9 because your thoughts are very far from what the Bible teaches which is UNCONDITIONAL ELECTION.

[nrajeff]

Originally Posted by Father_JD

Too bad your idea of what is fair does NOT conform to scripture, jeff.

---Look, FJD: You need to pick a side.

Side A: God is unfair and the Bible is the proof because it characterizes Him as being unfair and it is never wrong. If you don't like the fact that God is unfair, too bad--He doesn't have to be fair because He is God.

Side B: God IS fair, so even though the Bible portrays Him as horribly unfair, you just gotta have faith that He is really not like that.

I hope you realize that you can't pick both sides.

God certainly has His reasons whether they are discernable to humans or not.

---No one is saying He doesn't have REASONS. The issue is whether they are GOOD ones or not.
If God is sending Person A to heaven (but not because of ANYTHING A did) and He is sending Person B to hell (but not because B did anything different from what A did) then God may have a reason all right, but it can't be a good, valid, rational, fair one. THAT is the problem with Calvinism.

Please go back and read regarding the election of Jacob and NOT Esau in Romans 9 because your thoughts are very far from what the Bible teaches which is UNCONDITIONAL ELECTION.

----LDS can reconcile such apparent problems because LDS believe in a premortal world where people displayed varying degrees of obedience to God--just like people do HERE on Earth--and were promised blessings of varying worth. If the contradictions and illogic of your Calvinism ever bother you too much, you can always come back to the LDS where sane, God-glorifying doctrines reside.

[Father_JD]

God is ALWAYS FAIR, jeff. He simply refuses to conform to unregenerate mankind's opinion of what fairness is.

Your argument is not really with me, but with Paul as cited in Romans 9. You have yet to engage the scripture or his revelation given.

One point might help you:

ALL human beings are fallen and deserve eternal death. ALL human beings are in this state unless God reaches down and rescues those whom He has predestinated for eternal Life. God doesn't owe anyone "Grace". This is something you continue to misunderstand.

[Father_JD]

Originally Posted by jennieblue22

There is a HUGE problem with this belief. If God's election (were it to exist at all) is NOT "arbitrary", His reasoning for selection of the elect would stand alone and always make sense to stand true. That His reasons for elect selection are necessarily "known ONLY to Him" and applicable to only His own personal preference is actually the rather clear indicator of the arbitrary nature of the choosing of the elect.

Sorry, but your "reasoning" is faulty. Just because God's reasons are known only to Him do NOT make them "arbitary". That's a "non-sequitur".

CONTRADICTION!!! You had just previously stated that the elect are selected ONLY by God Himself - without the individual taking ANY role in that selection, and that the non-elect are NEVER offered the chance to accept God's grace - a chance that may ONLY be offered by God Himself if He so chooses to offer it, and cannot be obtained by any other means or by any action on the part of the individual. In which case, the chance for election - and thus the ability to accept the grace of God and leave the state of ****ation - is ONLY within the power of God and NOT in the individual's domain of power; thus the non-elect COULD NOT have chosen to be in a state of ****ation, when they had NO control over the circumstances that kept them in, or would have allowed for their release from, that horrid state.

And just how is this a "contradiction". You ***ert such, but give no evidence. Hence this is merely a knee-**** emotional response on your part. Fallen people are indeed content to REMAIN in their falleness...which so far has been your own CHOICE, hasn't it?

No, that is only an opinion insofar as the words " arbitrary and evil tyrant" are redefined to exclude the Abrahamic/Biblical God from such categorization. The fact remains that this God's judgment in regard to the selection of the elect is proven to be quite arbitrary by its very own nature, and only a truly heartless and uncomp***ionate soul could ever consider such a horrid thing as even allowing (let alone mandating) that One's own children/creation to forever burn in the hell of eternal ****ation - as supposed 'punishment' for an alleged 'mistake' committed by those who had NO POWER on their own to act differently - to be anything less than evil and tyrannical, and the One who does so as anything less than "unjust, unfair, unloving, and loathsome." This is particularly true when one factually understands that God had FULL control over the circumstances that might have prevented it butactively CHOSE not to allow those circumstances to be modified to a more favorable position for arbitrary personal reasons. Even by Reformed Christian understanding the Bible makes it clear that the Judeo-Christian God's reasoning for such decision-making is not known to the people; it is so because it is only tailored to His personal preference and therefore certainly arbitrary.

We're NOT God's "children" by nature. This is one of the prime errors of Mormon thinking. We are His CREATION. One becomes a "child of God" BY ADOPTION. And again, just because God has CHOSEN NOT to reveal His divine purposes to human beings that that makes his choices "arbitrary". Bad logic yet again.

And on a related note, it's quite unfair for God to knowingly create all of His children in such a manner as to make them worthy only of ****ation by default - particularly as this inherent lack of worth for salvation is given to all for NO fault of their own, that was within their control to change - and then pre-select a handpicked lucky few who may be able to override their default settings in a way that is not available to the rest, which comprise the vast majority of His creation.

Blame Adam and Eve for our inheriting the sin nature after The Fall. Btw...when are you going to ENGAGE BIBLICAL SCRIPTURE instead of pontificating what you FEEL is right or wrong about God's election of the saints?

The fact remains that the non-elect are NOT left behind by their choice. The decision was solely made arbitrarily by a God whose actions in this regard may indeed be thus be called "unjust, unfair, unloving, and loathsome" as was previously stated.

You're CHOOSING RIGHT NOW TO BE CONDEMNED and to remain in the darkness called, "Mormonism"! You're CHOOSING to believe in a FALSE "gospel", a FALSE "christ" and a FALSE "prophet". Ultimately, you will only have yourself to BLAME. I suggest you really read Romans 9 and PRAY to understand what lies therein.

Paul is NOT God. He was a mere man. God is loving; man has at times been known to hate.

Was Paul AN APOSTLE, divinely called to preach the TRUE gospel as well as receive REVELATION from God...or NOT??

Now the truth comes out. You CHOOSE NOT to believe the Bible. You CHOOSE NOT to believe Paul's teaching.

The Abrahamic/Biblical God may be declared to show mercy to some, but He CANNOT be declared as truly merciful if He does not bestow His mercy to ALL; He would then be UNmerciful to those who were not so fortunate to receive His mercy, for NO fault of their own doing!

You don't know the meaning of either "grace" or "mercy". He sovereignly chooses JUSTICE (which is something everyone DESERVES) for some and has "mercy" on others. He's God. You are NOT...although YOU think you know better than God Himself.

Whether you believe the Bible supports or opposes Reformed belief is entirely your own opinion, based on your personal preferred interpretations of the Bible; nevertheless, the fact remains that the TRUE God is, has always been, and will always be a God of love.

As said in the Bible (1 John 4:8, NIV) :
Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love.

Why don't you give viable SCRIPTURAL reasons as to WHY you don't believe the Bible teaches "Reformed" doctrine?

So far, we're only getting your OPINIONS. God is indeed "love", but love is NOT "god" which in effect is YOUR understanding of the verse.

[nrajeff]

Originally Posted by Father_JD

God is ALWAYS FAIR, jeff. He simply refuses to conform to unregenerate mankind's opinion of what fairness is.

----That is your conjecture. What if Western civilization's concept of fairness was given BY GOD? Do you REALLY think that God doesn't imbue His own sense of right and wrong to enlightened societies? Hello? U.S. Cons***ution? What about your own "Christian" church--are you saying that when it hands out decisions and judgments it claims to be FAIR, that they are actually nothing of the kind? If so, then what good is your church, if its sense of fairness contradicts GOD's? Why would you even call it a Christian church, if you believe that its idea of right and wrong is totally different from Christ's?

Logic wasn't your strong area at seminary, was it?

Your argument is not really with me

--Yes it is

but with Paul as cited in Romans 9.

---My argument is with your eisgesis of Paul as cited in Rom. 9.

God doesn't owe anyone "Grace".

---Ah, you're trying the old

"We ALL deserve hell, so if God saves a few of us--me, but not you, sorry--then how dare you complain that it's not fair? If God were fair, we'd ALL be in hell, not just you but me as well, so quit whining that it's not fair!"

el lame-o attempt at justifying the patent unfairness of Calvinism. Nice try, but it's more transparent than the Emperor's non-existent clothes.

If the fake god of Calvinism were fair, then it would not arbitrarily pick Person A for heaven (but not because of anything A did) and hypocritically pick Person B for hell (even though B did NOTHING different from what A did).

Time for my parable again:

********************************

10 kids, all of them 5 years old, walk into FJD's Candy Store. Each of them shoplifts one Tootsie Roll and each is caught. FJD imperiously yells "You all deserve to be executed for the capital crime of petty theft! Don't bother whining that the punishment doesn't fit the crime--this is MY store, so I get to make the rules--I am sovereign so what I say goes! But I am a merciful candy store owner, so I will only kill 9 of you. I will magnanimously let one of you---Jimmy--live, even though you did the same crime as the other 9 and you have done nothing deserving of mercy."

The 9 ask "Don't we deserve a second chance or something?"

Father JD roars: "I don't OWE you ANYTHING--not even an explanation for my actions, let alone some grace!"
So FJD, the God of the Candy Store, takes out a shotgun and kills 9 of the 10 terrified kids. Then he takes Jimmy under his arm and says, "Jimmy, not only will I spare your life, I am going to give you this entire candy store--not because you have done anything at all to deserve it of course--this is a completely unearned, unconditional free gift of my grace. Now NO ONE can accuse me of being unfair, right?"

Jimmy is still scared and nervous and confused as he looks over his 9 dead friends, but he is intimidated so he doesn't point out some flaws in Father JD's reasoning.

Well, in a few days there are 9 funerals, and the parents of those 9 kids that
the God of the Candy Store 'righteously' killed want some answers. They are "complaining" that what Father JD did was not fair on several levels. Father JD imperiously roars: "What are you talking about? I let ONE kid LIVE, didn't I? I could have killed them all! How dare you nine families claim that my system of justice isn't fair! Why, just ask little Jimmy here--HE thinks it's fair, right Jimmy?"

Which leaves those nine families wondering, not only where Father JD got his idea of what is fair, but also about his sanity if he thinks that a 5-year-old's one-time petty shoplifting is a capital crime.

[JustMe]

Originally Posted by nrajeff

----That is your conjecture. What if Western civilization's concept of fairness was given BY GOD? Do you REALLY think that God doesn't imbue His own sense of right and wrong to enlightened societies? Hello? U.S. Cons***ution? What about your own "Christian" church--are you saying that when it hands out decisions and judgments it claims to be FAIR, that they are actually nothing of the kind? If so, then what good is your church, if its sense of fairness contradicts GOD's? Why would you even call it a Christian church, if you believe that its idea of right and wrong is totally different from Christ's?

Logic wasn't your strong area at seminary, was it?


--Yes it is


---My argument is with your eisgesis of Paul as cited in Rom. 9.


---Ah, you're trying the old

"We ALL deserve hell, so if God saves a few of us--me, but not you, sorry--then how dare you complain that it's not fair? If God were fair, we'd ALL be in hell, not just you but me as well, so quit whining that it's not fair!"

el lame-o attempt at justifying the patent unfairness of Calvinism. Nice try, but it's more transparent than the Emperor's non-existent clothes.

If the fake god of Calvinism were fair, then it would not arbitrarily pick Person A for heaven (but not because of anything A did) and hypocritically pick Person B for hell (even though B did NOTHING different from what A did).

Time for my parable again:

********************************

10 kids, all of them 5 years old, walk into FJD's Candy Store. Each of them shoplifts one Tootsie Roll and each is caught. FJD imperiously yells "You all deserve to be executed for the capital crime of petty theft! Don't bother whining that the punishment doesn't fit the crime--this is MY store, so I get to make the rules--I am sovereign so what I say goes! But I am a merciful candy store owner, so I will only kill 9 of you. I will magnanimously let one of you---Jimmy--live, even though you did the same crime as the other 9 and you have done nothing deserving of mercy."

The 9 ask "Don't we deserve a second chance or something?"

Father JD roars: "I don't OWE you ANYTHING--not even an explanation for my actions, let alone some grace!"
So FJD, the God of the Candy Store, takes out a shotgun and kills 9 of the 10 terrified kids. Then he takes Jimmy under his arm and says, "Jimmy, not only will I spare your life, I am going to give you this entire candy store--not because you have done anything at all to deserve it of course--this is a completely unearned, unconditional free gift of my grace. Now NO ONE can accuse me of being unfair, right?"

Jimmy is still scared and nervous and confused as he looks over his 9 dead friends, but he is intimidated so he doesn't point out some flaws in Father JD's reasoning.

Well, in a few days there are 9 funerals, and the parents of those 9 kids that
the God of the Candy Store 'righteously' killed want some answers. They are "complaining" that what Father JD did was not fair on several levels. Father JD imperiously roars: "What are you talking about? I let ONE kid LIVE, didn't I? I could have killed them all! How dare you nine families claim that my system of justice isn't fair! Why, just ask little Jimmy here--HE thinks it's fair, right Jimmy?"

Which leaves those nine families wondering, not only where Father JD got his idea of what is fair, but also about his sanity if he thinks that a 5-year-old's one-time petty shoplifting is a capital crime.

I like that ****ogy, Jeff. And if we were made in God's likeness and image (as the Bible says we were), and if we're to KNOW God (as the Bible says we should), His fairness (at least according to how the Calvinists believe it) wouldn't be so foreign to almost everybody with a normal sense of right and wrong.

[nrajeff]

Originally Posted by JustMe

I like that ****ogy, Jeff. And if we were made in God's likeness and image (as the Bible says we were), and if we're to KNOW God (as the Bible says we should), His fairness (at least according to how the Calvinists believe it) wouldn't be so foreign to almost everybody with a normal sense of right and wrong.

---Exactly. One of the gulfs between LDS and "traditional" fundie Christianity is the issue of how much of a spark of deity human beings can have. Fundies, with their Jonathan Edwards, Calvinist, Dante, and Augustine-influenced "hatred" of humanity, think that humans are lower and more alien to God than the herpes virus is to Mother Teresa. So OF COURSE they think that it is IMPOSSIBLE for our concepts of right and wrong to be anything like God's concepts of right and wrong.

When you think about it, their position is illogical, even by their own doctrines. Adam and Eve ended up knowing good from evil AS THE GODS did, right? And we, their descendants, "INHERITED" that knowledge, correct? So the fundie Evangelicals, if they were consistent with their own beliefs, should admit that people are able to have a sense of right and wrong--FAIR and UNFAIR--that is similar to God's. Not totally, 180 degrees, opposite.

Some day I will write an article on the many illogical ideas that are in "traditoinal" Evangelicalism. It will be a long article.

[theway]

Originally Posted by nrajeff

Time for my parable again:

********************************

10 kids, all of them 5 years old, walk into FJD's Candy Store. Each of them shoplifts one Tootsie Roll and each is caught. FJD imperiously yells "You all deserve to be executed for the capital crime of petty theft! Don't bother whining that the punishment doesn't fit the crime--this is MY store, so I get to make the rules--I am sovereign so what I say goes! But I am a merciful candy store owner, so I will only kill 9 of you. I will magnanimously let one of you---Jimmy--live, even though you did the same crime as the other 9 and you have done nothing deserving of mercy."

The 9 ask "Don't we deserve a second chance or something?"

Father JD roars: "I don't OWE you ANYTHING--not even an explanation for my actions, let alone some grace!"
So FJD, the God of the Candy Store, takes out a shotgun and kills 9 of the 10 terrified kids. Then he takes Jimmy under his arm and says, "Jimmy, not only will I spare your life, I am going to give you this entire candy store--not because you have done anything at all to deserve it of course--this is a completely unearned, unconditional free gift of my grace. Now NO ONE can accuse me of being unfair, right?"

Jimmy is still scared and nervous and confused as he looks over his 9 dead friends, but he is intimidated so he doesn't point out some flaws in Father JD's reasoning.

Well, in a few days there are 9 funerals, and the parents of those 9 kids that
the God of the Candy Store 'righteously' killed want some answers. They are "complaining" that what Father JD did was not fair on several levels. Father JD imperiously roars: "What are you talking about? I let ONE kid LIVE, didn't I? I could have killed them all! How dare you nine families claim that my system of justice isn't fair! Why, just ask little Jimmy here--HE thinks it's fair, right Jimmy?"

Which leaves those nine families wondering, not only where Father JD got his idea of what is fair, but also about his sanity if he thinks that a 5-year-old's one-time petty shoplifting is a capital crime.

There are two small bits of evidence that you left out of your ****ogy (not that it will change the outcome).

First, the free gracer FJD knew long before the kids got there, that they were going to steal the Tootsie Rolls. He could have set out a guard to stop them (like he did in his Garden of Eden Store) or he could have removed the temptation; But he choose to do neither. After all, FJD had already decided long before they got there, that he was going to kill 9 of them and spare one, and it really didn’t matter whether they stole the candy or not, After all, he was in charge and couldn’t let some 5 year old decide his own fate. He wasn’t going to be dissuaded by any crying or calls for mercy either. But which one would he save? FJD decided that the only thing to do was to put their names in a hat and draw out one name before they got there. What could be fairer than that?


Second; I believe the 10th kid decided he couldn’t live with such a store owner as FJD, let alone mind his store. He told FJD that he thought he was evil, and didn’t want his store, or have anything to do with him. “I don’t care” said FJD, you’re going to be chained to the floor and love it! “Oh and by the way I’ll be expecting a hand written, thank you card, every day and twice on Sunday”

[theway]

Originally Posted by nrajeff

---Exactly. One of the gulfs between LDS and "traditional" fundie Christianity is the issue of how much of a spark of deity human beings can have. Fundies, with their Jonathan Edwards, Calvinist, Dante, and Augustine-influenced "hatred" of humanity, think that humans are lower and more alien to God than the herpes virus is to Mother Teresa. So OF COURSE they think that it is IMPOSSIBLE for our concepts of right and wrong to be anything like God's concepts of right and wrong.

When you think about it, their position is illogical, even by their own doctrines. Adam and Eve ended up knowing good from evil AS THE GODS did, right? And we, their descendants, "INHERITED" that knowledge, correct? So the fundie Evangelicals, if they were consistent with their own beliefs, should admit that people are able to have a sense of right and wrong--FAIR and UNFAIR--that is similar to God's. Not totally, 180 degrees, opposite.

Some day I will write an article on the many illogical ideas that are in "traditoinal" Evangelicalism. It will be a long article.

But to a true believer of free grace; right and wrong, are not germane to your salvation. Your salvation is based on some unknown criteria, that apparently even God is unable to reveal.

[nrajeff]

Originally Posted by theway

There are two small bits of evidence that you left out of your ****ogy (not that it will change the outcome).

First, the free gracer FJD knew long before the kids got there, that they were going to steal the Tootsie Rolls. He could have set out a guard to stop them (like he did in his Garden of Eden Store) or he could have removed the temptation; But he choose to do neither. After all, FJD had already decided long before they got there, that he was going to kill 9 of them and spare one, and it really didn’t matter whether they stole the candy or not, After all, he was in charge and couldn’t let some 5 year old decide his own fate. He wasn’t going to be dissuaded by any crying or calls for mercy either. But which one would he save? FJD decided that the only thing to do was to put their names in a hat and draw out one name before they got there. What could be fairer than that?

----Yes, good catch. Predestination means that FJD knew those meddling kids would be coming, and instead of installing a theft-PREVENTION system, FJD did the opposite: He put a sign out front saying "Delicious candy inside!" Then he PLACED the kids in his store and he also placed Satan in the store, knowing that Satan would tempt the kids to steal some candy.

Second; I believe the 10th kid decided he couldn’t live with such a store owner as FJD, let alone mind his store. He told FJD that he thought he was evil, and didn’t want his store, or have anything to do with him. “I don’t care” said FJD, you’re going to be chained to the floor and love it! “Oh and by the way I’ll be expecting a hand written, thank you card, every day and twice on Sunday”

---Well, the story actually goes that FJD will invade the kid's mind and FORCE the kid to be happy there. The kid will be UNABLE to resist FJD's grace. It will be impossible for The Chosen Kid to resist being chosen to be the Elect Kid.

Welcome to the Calvinism Candy Store, where it's all fair because God said so and quit asking so many troubling questions, you meddling kid.

[RealFakeHair]

Originally Posted by theway

But to a true believer of free grace; right and wrong, are not germane to your salvation. Your salvation is based on some unknown criteria, that apparently even God is unable to reveal.

Kobol!

[Mesenja]

Originally Posted by Father_JD

LOL. WHY wont you address the FACT that Paul specifies election of INDIVIDUALS such as Moses and NOT PHARAOH?

The CONTEXT of Romans 9 is about INDIVIDUAL ELECTION but in typical Mormon fashion you refuse to address the text in favor of some other you think proves your case.

Methinks you're the nuh uh guy here Mesenja.

Let us have a look at your scriptural silver bullet shall we that supposedly proves Unconditional Election. I will post your proof text without comment. It will then be shown from the scriptures that Paul was not referring to individuals but to nations.

Romans 9:15-18 (New American Standard Bible)

15 For He says to Moses,"I WILL HAVE MERCY ON WHOM I HAVE MERCY,AND I WILL HAVE COMP***ION ON WHOM I HAVE COMP***ION."
16 So then it does not depend on the man who wills or the man who runs,but on God who has mercy.
17 For the Scripture says to Pharaoh,"FOR THIS VERY PURPOSE I RAISED YOU UP,TO DEMONSTRATE MY POWER IN YOU,AND THAT MY NAME MIGHT BE PROCLAIMED THROUGHOUT THE WHOLE EARTH."
18 So then He has mercy on whom He desires,and He hardens whom He desires.

First Paul starts off by quoting the Old Testament verse Exodus 33:19. If this scripture is viewed in it's proper context it is talking about nations not individuals. Not once in Romans 9 does Paul talk about individual election or is it mentioned in Exodus 33 the very chapter he quotes from.

Romans 9:15 (New American Standard Bible)
15 For He says to Moses,"I WILL HAVE MERCY ON WHOM I HAVE MERCY,AND I WILL HAVE COMP***ION ON WHOM I HAVE COMP***ION"

Exodus 33:19 the very verse he quotes from(New American Standard Bible)
19 And He said,"I Myself will make all My goodness p*** before you,and will proclaim the name of the LORD before you;and I will be gracious to whom I will be gracious,and will show comp***ion on whom I will show comp***ion."

Exodus 33:13-20 (New American Standard Bible)

13"Now therefore,I pray You,if I have found favor in Your sight,let me know Your ways that I may know You,so that I may find favor in Your sight Consider too,that this nation is Your people."
14 And He said,"My presence shall go with you,and I will give you rest."
15 Then he said to Him,"If Your presence does not go with us,do not lead us up from here.
16 "For how then can it be known that I have found favor in Your sight,I and Your people? Is it not by Your going with us,so that we,I and Your people,may be distinguished from all the other people who are upon the face of the earth?"
17 The LORD said to Moses,I will also do this thing of which you have spoken;for you have found favor in My sight and I have known you by name."
18 Then Moses said,"I pray You,show me Your glory!"
19 And He said,"I Myself will make all My goodness p*** before you,and will proclaim the name of the LORD before you;and I will be gracious to whom I will be gracious,and will show comp***ion on whom I will show comp***ion."

God promised Moses that "My presence shall go with you,and I will give you rest." It is God's sovereign will to show kindness to what ever nation he will show kindness to,and comp***ion to any nation God will have comp***ion on by choosing them to have the lineage through which the Messiah will come.

19 "I will be gracious to whom I will be gracious,and will show comp***ion on whom I will show comp***ion."

Next Paul tells us that it is not dependent on him who is willing,nor of him who is running to have his nation be the one that is chosen to have the Messiah come through. It is strictly according to God's mercy which he showed Israel by having his presence with them,finding favor with them and showing his glory to them.

16 So then it does not depend on the man who wills or the man who runs,but on God who has mercy.

God raised up Pharaoh as a demonstration of his power and by this made his name known to all other nations. This was shown when the nations of Philistia,Edom,Moab and Canaan let Israel p*** over without challenge because they saw what God did to the Egyptians.

Romans 9:17 (New American Standard Bible)

17 For the Scripture says to Pharaoh,"FOR THIS VERY PURPOSE I RAISED YOU UP,TO DEMONSTRATE MY POWER IN YOU,AND THAT MY NAME MIGHT BE PROCLAIMED THROUGHOUT THE WHOLE EARTH."

Exodus 15:14-16 (New American Standard Bible)

14 "The peoples have heard,they tremble;
Anguish has gripped the inhabitants of Philistia.
15 "Then the chiefs of Edom were dismayed;
The leaders of Moab,trembling grips them;
All the inhabitants of Canaan have melted away.
16 "Terror and dread fall upon them;
By the greatness of Your arm they are motionless as stone;
Until Your people p*** over,O LORD,
Until the people p*** over whom You have purchased.

When Pharaoh saw that Aaron's rod became a serpent and swallowed up the snakes that the wise men and the sorcerers,and also the magicians of Egypt tried to duplicate he made the choice to harden his own heart. God not only allowed Pharaoh to suffer the consequences of his own stubbornness and hard heart but helped him along the path he had chosen by making his heart even more stubborn.

Exodus 7:13-14 New American Standard Bible (NASB)

13 Yet Pharaoh's heart was hardened,and he did not listen to them,as the LORD had said.
14 Then the LORD said to Moses,"Pharaoh's heart is stubborn;he refuses to let the people go.

[Father_JD]

First Paul starts off by quoting the Old Testament verse Exodus 33:19. If this scripture is viewed in it's proper context it is talking about nations not individuals. Not once in Romans 9 or Exodus 33 does Paul talk about individual election.

Who's talking about Exodus 33?? I'm talking about Romans 9. Paul bases his arguments upon other scripture AS HIS SPRINGBOARD.

Romans 9: Individual election of Jacob over Esau. No mention of "nations", but of two individuals and "election" NOT AS A RESULT OF WHAT THEY HAVE DONE. And yet this is exactly how you argue!! God "chose" Moses and NOT Pharoah BECAUSE PHAROAH WAS A BAD DUDE, HARDENING HIS HEART. Remember Paul says regarding Jacob and Esau, "NOT HAVING DONE ANYTHING GOOD OR EVIL" so that election can stand. You've destroyed the whole meaning of election, btw.

Moses over Pharoah. God elects Moses but NOT PHAROAH. Pharoah was created indeed for God's demonstration of power as a "vessel unto wrath". Vessel NOT vessels.

Clearly from the context of Romans 9, it isn't the ONE who runs after, or wills ELECTION, but God ALONE who shows mercy.

You refuse to engage the context of Romans 9 because it destroys your "nations" election argument.

[Father_JD]

Originally Posted by Father_JD
God is ALWAYS FAIR, jeff. He simply refuses to conform to unregenerate mankind's opinion of what fairness is.

----That is your conjecture. What if Western civilization's concept of fairness was given BY GOD? Do you REALLY think that God doesn't imbue His own sense of right and wrong to enlightened societies? Hello? U.S. Cons***ution? What about your own "Christian" church--are you saying that when it hands out decisions and judgments it claims to be FAIR, that they are actually nothing of the kind? If so, then what good is your church, if its sense of fairness contradicts GOD's? Why would you even call it a Christian church, if you believe that its idea of right and wrong is totally different from Christ's?

Here's my response. Please pay close attention, jeff:

Mankind is FALLEN. Sin has corrupted every area of our being. Unregenerate man can NOT fully grasp the nature of God's "fairness" or "justice", etc.

But BECAUSE human beings were created "Imago Dei" there remains a semblance or basic understanding of what cons***utes "fairness"...to a degree but only to a degree but is NOT and can NOT be complete or perfect. There's your answer, jeff, so please don't turn around and say it wasn't addressed, etc.

Logic wasn't your strong area at seminary, was it?

Biblical understanding wasn't your strong area at Mormon seminary, was it, jeff?


Quote:
Your argument is not really with me

--Yes it is

Nope.


Quote:
but with Paul as cited in Romans 9.

---My argument is with your eisgesis of Paul as cited in Rom. 9.

This cons***utes the typical "nuh-uh" Mormon response, jeff. I would hope you could do better and actually put your money where your mouth is, i.e. actually demonstrate just "how" I "eisegeted" Romans 9. Where's your viable alternative "interpretation"?


Quote:
God doesn't owe anyone "Grace".

---Ah, you're trying the old

"We ALL deserve hell, so if God saves a few of us--me, but not you, sorry--then how dare you complain that it's not fair? If God were fair, we'd ALL be in hell, not just you but me as well, so quit whining that it's not fair!"

el lame-o attempt at justifying the patent unfairness of Calvinism. Nice try, but it's more transparent than the Emperor's non-existent clothes.

If the fake god of Calvinism were fair, then it would not arbitrarily pick Person A for heaven (but not because of anything A did) and hypocritically pick Person B for hell (even though B did NOTHING different from what A did).

Ya know what, jeff. You're right. God is simply not "fair" from the human standpoint, so I'll cease and desist on insisting He's "fair". God chooses justice for some, and mercy for others. ALL deserve justice, but God sovereignly decrees MERCY for others.

Time for my parable again:

********************************

10 kids, all of them 5 years old, walk into FJD's Candy Store. Each of them shoplifts one Tootsie Roll and each is caught. FJD imperiously yells "You all deserve to be executed for the capital crime of petty theft! Don't bother whining that the punishment doesn't fit the crime--this is MY store, so I get to make the rules--I am sovereign so what I say goes! But I am a merciful candy store owner, so I will only kill 9 of you. I will magnanimously let one of you---Jimmy--live, even though you did the same crime as the other 9 and you have done nothing deserving of mercy."

LOL. Not even close to the reality, jeff. Your "parable" is NOT ****ogus:

Here's the REAL scenario:

10 kids, all of them 5 years old, are already DEAD as having SINNED by shoplifitng the tootsie rolls. God chooses 4 to become ALIVE again according to His own wisdom and sovereign choice.

The rest of your "****ogy" fails and doesn't require a response...

What you also FAIL to understand, jeff...is that even the most "trivial" sin is worthy of eternal death. Why? Because God is HOLY and can NOT look upon sin. If you knew your Bible as well as your spurious Mormon writings, you would have KNOWN this.

[Father_JD]

So are you denying God's OMNISCIENCE? I mean, that's the only point I can derive from your skewed understanding regarding "grace" and "mercy".

[nrajeff]

Originally Posted by Father_JD

Here's my response. Please pay close attention, jeff:

---I ALWAYS pay close attention to what you say, because I want to pick out every error that I can.

Mankind is FALLEN.

---But not as far as you Calvin types think it has. You think that mankind fell from total, 100% perfection to total, 100% evilness and depravity. There is plenty of space between those 2 extremes that mankind could have fallen to. But Calvinism is all about extremes. No gray areas for Calvinism. It's one of its hugest flaws.

Sin has corrupted every area of our being. Unregenerate man can NOT fully grasp the nature of God's "fairness" or "justice", etc.

---Nice try changing the goal posts from "God's ideas of fair and unfair are totally opposite ours" to "We can't FULLY grasp God's ideas on the issue."

But BECAUSE human beings were created "Imago Dei" there remains a semblance or basic understanding of what cons***utes "fairness"...to a degree but only to a degree but is NOT and can NOT be complete or perfect.

--I never said our understanding was 100%. A person with only an 80% understanding of right and wrong, fair and unfair could still easily tell that Calvinism is totally messed up.

There's your answer, jeff, so please don't turn around and say it wasn't addressed, etc.

--I won't say you didn't address it. I might say you did only a mediocre *** of addressing it.

Biblical understanding wasn't your strong area at Mormon seminary, was it, jeff?

---True. But thanks to all the errors (from Calvinists and Trinitarians) I have been exposed to since then, I have a much better understanding now.

....put your money where your mouth is, i.e. actually demonstrate just "how" I "eisegeted" Romans 9.

---Let me finish trashing your original claim that God's ways are TOTALLY not our ways first.

Ya know what, jeff. You're right.

--About time you realized that.

God is simply not "fair" from the human standpoint, so I'll cease and desist on insisting He's "fair".

--But WAIIIT a second: You just got finished equivocating that "we can't COMPLETELY understand His sense of fair and unfair" and now you're going back to "God is totally unfair according to our ideas of fair and unfair"?? Pick a position and stay with it. I am not so good at hitting moving targets.

God chooses justice for some, and mercy for others. ALL deserve justice, but God sovereignly decrees MERCY for others.

---You are really invested in denying that God could use a meritocracy system for handing out rewards and punishments, aren't you? WHY? Why won't you accept the possibility that God is fair in how He deals with people, based upon the choices they make in the circumstances they're in???? Why must Calvinism always go with the LEAST logical, LEAST fair of the possibilities, and pronouce "THAT is the way things really are" ??? Is it just "holdover logic" from the Dark Ages ("If the accused floats, it proves she is a witch and shall be burned to death--if she drowns, then she wasn't a witch and her soul that we just killed will go to heaven so it's all good either way") and it dies hard like old habits do?

[Mesenja]

Originally Posted by Father_JD

Who's talking about Exodus 33? I'm talking about Romans 9. Paul bases his arguments upon other scripture AS HIS SPRINGBOARD. You refuse to engage the context of Romans 9 because it destroys your "nations" election argument.

I have engaged the context of Romans 9 and demonstrated to you that the context of this chapter is about nations not individuals. Every Old Testament scripture he quotes is from chapters not dealing with individual election but oif nations. If Paul based his argument on other scriptures as his springboard to teach your Calvinist claptrap then why does the scriptures he quotes from make no mention of it?

[Mesenja]

Originally Posted by Father_JD

You have done no such thing. The context of Romans 9 is about INDIVIDUALS:Jacob and Esau.
Moses and Pharoah.

Besides this,you must understand that nations are comprised of <gasp> INDIVIDUALS. Duh,Mesenja-dude.

Even your vaunted "proof-texts" aren't really about election of nations. As explained before,you do the Mormon "thing" IGNORE and DISMISS the context of the given p***age and appeal to OTHER scripture you hope makes your case or at least obfuscates the issue at hand.

Wanna another typical "bait and switch" Mormon trick like this one of yours?

Here ya go,Mesenja.

The CONTEXT of John 10:30 is DIFFERENT from the context of John 17,but when the Mormon is shown that Jesus words,"I and my Father ARE ONE" from John 10 is NOT about "one in purpose, blah,blah, blah",the Mormon knee ****s to John 17 because the Mormon "thinks" or "feels" this somehow negates the CLEAR CONTEXT of John 10.

You Mormons are just chock-full of little bad hermeneutical tricks.

You lost your case only your too Mormons proud to admit it.

I have shown you exactly what Old Testament citations that the apostle Paul is quoting from. He is clearly referring to nations and not individuals. All you can do is accuse me of bait and switch tactics and bad hermeneutical tricks. Is this the best you can do Father_JD? Wait I forgot you repeat your knee **** nuh-uh response. Finishing off with a flourish of false bravado was a nice touch.

[nrajeff]

Originally Posted by Mesenja

I have shown you exactly what Old Testament citations that the apostle Paul is quoting from. He is clearly referring to nations and not individuals. All you can do is accuse me of bait and switch tactics and bad hermeneutical tricks. Is this the best you can do Father_JD? Wait I forgot you repeat your knee **** nuh-uh response. Finishing off with a flourish of false bravado was a nice touch.

---He could add an Andyism, for good measure: "Your post is totally irrelevant."

[Vlad III]

Originally Posted by nrajeff

---He could add an Andyism, for good measure: "Your post is totally irrelevant."

"so what's your point?"

Amen.