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

[Father_JD]

Originally Posted by jennieblue22

Actually, one has been pointed out here in the forum - namely, James' statement that "faith without works is dead" (per James 2:14-26; see BMD's post) vs. Paul's emphasis that faith alone (and not works at all) matters.

WHY do you misrepresent the Apostle Paul? Where did he EVER declare that works "don't matter"??

Tts 3:8 [This is] a faithful saying, and these things I will that thou affirm constantly, that they which have believed in God might be careful to maintain good works. These things are good and profitable unto men.

Tts 3:14 And let ours also learn to maintain good works for necessary uses, that they be not unfruitful.


What every Mormon FAILS to grasp is that "works" do NOT contribute to the salvific process:

Eph 2:8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: [it is] the gift of God:


Eph 2:9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.


Eph 2:10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.

[Father_JD]

Originally Posted by jennieblue22

Romans 9 ***erts that God has the power and ability to do as He wishes to anyone - and certainly no one is denying that He could make the world all believe (or all disbelieve) in an instant if He so chooses - but the fact is that He doesn't necessarily do so; just as although it may well be in His power to destroy the universe in an instant, He certainly hasn't chosen to do so (yet).

"...He doesn't necessarily do so..."???

Clearly you don't understand Romans 9:


Rom 9:9 For this [is] the word of promise, At this time will I come, and Sara shall have a son.


Rom 9:10 And not only [this]; but when Rebecca also had conceived by one, [even] by our father Isaac;


Rom 9:11 (For [the children] being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth


Rom 9:12 It was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger.


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


Uh, this is proof positive that God most certainly chooses to do so. And here Paul affirms that in the case of Jacob and Esau!!

Rom 9:14 ¶ What shall we say then? [Is there] unrighteousness with God? God forbid.

In reality, ALL those who deny God's sovereign decrees (i.e. necessarily chooses) declare God as being "unrighteous". You have just done that, whether wittingly or NOT.


Rom 9:15 For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have comp***ion on whom I will have comp***ion.


Rom 9:16 So then [it is] not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy.


Did you catch that?? God will have mercy on whom HE SO CHOOSES. Why? So that salvation is according to ELECTION (uh, remember Paul says that it wasn't according to their "works"?). Election is not dependent upon the one who "wills" it. It's not dependent upon one who "runs" (after it) but is SOLEY dependent upon God who "SHOWS MERCY".

Ya still wanna keep to your theology that "God doesn't necessarily so choose"??

If so, I suggest you continue to read and read Romans 9 IN CONTEXT until it sinks in.



Rom 9:17 For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth.


What did Paul just write? Uh...something about His PURPOSE in rasing up Pharaoh in order to demonstrate His power? Could you please enlighten everyone here how THIS is NOT a case of God NOT "necessarily choosing"??


Sure sounds like God necessarily CHOOSING to me. Got any legitmate "interpretation" BASED UPON THE BIBLE AND THE BIBLE ALONE?


Rom 9:18 Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will [have mercy], and whom he will he hardeneth.

Catch that again? Paul declares that God WILL have mercy upon whom HE SO CHOOSES, and He will HARDEN those WHOM HE SO CHOOSES.

Sure ya wanna keep to your original thoughts here?


Rom 9:19 Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will?

And here Paul anticipates the objections of those who don't like God's SOVEREIGN CHOICE IN ELECTION. Count yourself included.


Rom 9:20 Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed [it], Why hast thou made me thus?

Paul just asked YOU who do you think you ARE that you can reply against Him. Serious stuff, here.


Rom 9:21 Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?


But you've as much as said that isn't the case here. God doesn't necessarily "choose" one to be either a "vessel unto honor" and ANOTHER UNTO DISHONOR.


Rom 9:22 [What] if God, willing to shew [his] wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction:


Rom 9:23 And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory,


Rom 9:24 Even us, whom he hath called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?

[Father_JD]

Originally Posted by jennieblue22

Any belief system ***erting that - including Mormonism, if it does so - is not necessarily "twisting" belief.

LOL. I've already demonstrated YOUR "twisting" of Romans 9!

[jennieblue22]

Originally Posted by Father_JD

WHY do you misrepresent the Apostle Paul? Where did he EVER declare that works "don't matter"??

Christians often misinterpret the Bible (particularly using his words) to state that works "don't matter".

[jennieblue22]

Originally Posted by Father_JD

"...He doesn't necessarily do so..."???

Clearly you don't understand Romans 9:


Rom 9:9 For this [is] the word of promise, At this time will I come, and Sara shall have a son.


Rom 9:10 And not only [this]; but when Rebecca also had conceived by one, [even] by our father Isaac;


Rom 9:11 (For [the children] being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth


Rom 9:12 It was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger.


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


Uh, this is proof positive that God most certainly chooses to do so. And here Paul affirms that in the case of Jacob and Esau!!

Rom 9:14 ¶ What shall we say then? [Is there] unrighteousness with God? God forbid.

In reality, ALL those who deny God's sovereign decrees (i.e. necessarily chooses) declare God as being "unrighteous". You have just done that, whether wittingly or NOT.


Rom 9:15 For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have comp***ion on whom I will have comp***ion.


Rom 9:16 So then [it is] not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy.


Did you catch that?? God will have mercy on whom HE SO CHOOSES. Why? So that salvation is according to ELECTION (uh, remember Paul says that it wasn't according to their "works"?). Election is not dependent upon the one who "wills" it. It's not dependent upon one who "runs" (after it) but is SOLEY dependent upon God who "SHOWS MERCY".

Ya still wanna keep to your theology that "God doesn't necessarily so choose"??

If so, I suggest you continue to read and read Romans 9 IN CONTEXT until it sinks in.



Rom 9:17 For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth.


What did Paul just write? Uh...something about His PURPOSE in rasing up Pharaoh in order to demonstrate His power? Could you please enlighten everyone here how THIS is NOT a case of God NOT "necessarily choosing"??


Sure sounds like God necessarily CHOOSING to me. Got any legitmate "interpretation" BASED UPON THE BIBLE AND THE BIBLE ALONE?


Rom 9:18 Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will [have mercy], and whom he will he hardeneth.

Catch that again? Paul declares that God WILL have mercy upon whom HE SO CHOOSES, and He will HARDEN those WHOM HE SO CHOOSES.

Sure ya wanna keep to your original thoughts here?


Rom 9:19 Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will?

And here Paul anticipates the objections of those who don't like God's SOVEREIGN CHOICE IN ELECTION. Count yourself included.


Rom 9:20 Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed [it], Why hast thou made me thus?

Paul just asked YOU who do you think you ARE that you can reply against Him. Serious stuff, here.


Rom 9:21 Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?


But you've as much as said that isn't the case here. God doesn't necessarily "choose" one to be either a "vessel unto honor" and ANOTHER UNTO DISHONOR.


Rom 9:22 [What] if God, willing to shew [his] wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction:


Rom 9:23 And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory,


Rom 9:24 Even us, whom he hath called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?

Originally Posted by Father_JD

LOL. I've already demonstrated YOUR "twisting" of Romans 9!

In what way does the quoted p***age contradict what i said in my post:

Originally Posted by jennieblue22

Romans 9 ***erts that God has the power and ability to do as He wishes to anyone - and certainly no one is denying that He could make the world all believe (or all disbelieve) in an instant if He so chooses - but the fact is that He doesn't necessarily do so; just as although it may well be in His power to destroy the universe in an instant, He certainly hasn't chosen to do so (yet).

... or demonstrate my "twisting" of its meaning?!

[Father_JD]

In what way does the quoted p***age contradict what i said in my post:


Quote:
Originally Posted by jennieblue22
Romans 9 ***erts that God has the power and ability to do as He wishes to anyone - and certainly no one is denying that He could make the world all believe (or all disbelieve) in an instant if He so chooses - but the fact is that He doesn't necessarily do so; just as although it may well be in His power to destroy the universe in an instant, He certainly hasn't chosen to do so (yet).

... or demonstrate my "twisting" of its meaning?!

Did you bother to READ what Paul wrote? Or my exegesis of his statements that you can quite astonishingly NOT see that God DOES indeed CHOOSE based upon His PURPOSES and WILL.

It's NOT theoretical. It's NOT a case of "He could but doesn't necessarily choose". He MOST certainly did in the case of Jacob, Esau, and Pharaoh and Paul extends this to EVERYONE in the nature of ELECTION.

How is it you don't comprehend?

[bhuvana-mohan dasa]

Originally Posted by Father_JD

Did you bother to READ what Paul wrote? Or my exegesis of his statements that you can quite astonishingly NOT see that God DOES indeed CHOOSE based upon His PURPOSES and WILL.

It's NOT theoretical. It's NOT a case of "He could but doesn't necessarily choose". He MOST certainly did in the case of Jacob, Esau, and Pharaoh and Paul extends this to EVERYONE in the nature of ELECTION.

How is it you don't comprehend?

Perhaps an "election" on your own part to avoid capitalization of nearly every other word in your response would enhance your reader's perception of continuity in the thoughts you are interested in communicating, JD. Perhaps then, they might be regarded more seriously.

ys,
bmd.

[jennieblue22]

Originally Posted by Father_JD

Did you bother to READ what Paul wrote? Or my exegesis of his statements that you can quite astonishingly NOT see that God DOES indeed CHOOSE based upon His PURPOSES and WILL. ...

How is it you don't comprehend?

??!!?!?! All i ***erted was that God doesn't necessarily do all that He is capable of (or even all that He says He is capable of doing) - that's not in contradiction with ANYTHING given, nor is it "twisting" any scriptural p***age - how is it that YOU don't comprehend?!

[Father_JD]

Originally Posted by bhuvana-mohan dasa

Perhaps an "election" on your own part to avoid capitalization of nearly every other word in your response would enhance your reader's perception of continuity in the thoughts you are interested in communicating, JD. Perhaps then, they might be regarded more seriously.

ys,
bmd.

Perhaps an "election" to engage with the scriputre on your own part to avoid the appearance of deflection of every exegeted verse in your response would enhance your readers' perception of an actual response of merit in the thoughts you are interested in communicating, bhakta-dude. Perhaps then, they might be regarded more seriously instead of being rightly judged as ex-Mormon smoke and mirrors tactics.

[jennieblue22]

Originally Posted by Father_JD

Perhaps an "election" to engage with the scriputre on your own part to avoid the appearance of deflection of every exegeted verse in your response would enhance your readers' perception of an actual response of merit in the thoughts you are interested in communicating, bhakta-dude. Perhaps then, they might be regarded more seriously instead of being rightly judged as ex-Mormon smoke and mirrors tactics.

The scriptural p***age in question was addressed in a previous post with a proper response; the last post to which you replied was in reference to your failure to properly answer to that response.

[Mesenja]

Originally Posted by Father_JD

Romans 9:9 For this [is] the word of promise, At this time will I come, and Sara shall have a son. 10 And not only [this]; but when Rebecca also had conceived by one,[even] by our father Isaac; 11 (For [the children] being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil,that the purpose of God according to election might stand,not of works,but of him that calleth 12 It was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger. 13 As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.

Paul makes reference to the two nations that descended from Jacob and Esau--Israel and Edom (see Malachi 1:2-5) and not individuals.

Originally Posted by Father_JD

Uh,this is proof positive that God most certainly chooses to do so. And here Paul affirms that in the case of Jacob and Esau!

Uh no it is proof positive that you impose Calvinist doctrine on the Bible.

[Libby]

*****Completely off topic******

I like the Ravi Zacharias quote in your signature, Mesenja. I even borrowed it to put on my Facebook page.

I have to say, I even agree with the Maxwell quote, except I think it's important what we elevate to the level of "scripture". But, in essence, I agree.

John Ruskin was a bit of a rebel and quite progressive for his time. What we do is important, but what we do always stems from what we "think" and "believe". Thought comes first, then action.

[Mesenja]

Originally Posted by Libby

I like the Ravi Zacharias quote in your signature,Mesenja. I even borrowed it to put on my Facebook page.

I have to say,I even agree with the Maxwell quote, except I think it's important what we elevate to the level of "scripture". But,in essence,I agree.

John Ruskin was a bit of a rebel and quite progressive for his time. What we do is important, but what we do always stems from what we "think" and "believe". Thought comes first, then action.

Yes what you do what you ultimately think and believe. But in the end it is not what you say it is what you do.

"Sow an act and you reap a habit.
Sow a habit and you reap a character.
Sow a character and you reap a destiny."

Charles Reade

[Libby]

Originally Posted by Mesenja

Yes what you do what you ultimately think and believe. But in the end it is not what you say it is what you do.

I agree.

We will do what our heart most desires.

"And I will give you a new heart, and a new spirit I will put within you. And I will remove the heart of stone from your flesh and give you a heart of flesh." Ezekiel 36:26

[nrajeff]

Originally Posted by Libby

I agree.We will do what our heart most desires.

---So, when we consider the people who spend every day attacking the LDS....they are doing what their hearts most desire.

[Libby]

Originally Posted by nrajeff

---So, when we consider the people who spend every day attacking the LDS....they are doing what their hearts most desire.

Have to admit, it bothers me that some who profess Christianity often forget to temper their words with the love of Christ. (That includes me, at times)

[nrajeff]

Originally Posted by Libby

Have to admit, it bothers me that some who profess Christianity often forget to temper their words with the love of Christ. (That includes me, at times)

---That is part of it but not the main point. The main point is that if we do what our heart most desires, and what we are doing is not telling people the good news that Jesus lives and is the savior and that He died for them, then telling people the good news that Jesus lives and is the savior and that He died for them is NOT what our heart most desires--mocking other people, trying to make them feel ashamed of their beliefs and experiences, and telling them NEGATIVE stuff, is what our heart most desires.

[Libby]

Originally Posted by nrajeff

---That is part of it but not the main point. The main point is that if we do what our heart most desires, and what we are doing is not telling people the good news that Jesus lives and is the savior and that He died for them, then telling people the good news that Jesus lives and is the savior and that He died for them is NOT what our heart most desires--mocking other people, trying to make them feel ashamed of their beliefs and experiences, and telling them NEGATIVE stuff, is what our heart most desires.

Yes, I get your point, Jeff.

Is that what you do on these boards most of the time?

Not meaning to sound accusing. I'm just saying, I don't think any of us are completely above it (saved or not).

What ARE we doing here? lol <sigh>

Seriously, I've been asking myself that quite a lot, lately. I'm not sure I'm knowledgable enough about the truth, myself, to be lecturing others on the truth.

I do have an abiding faith in Jesus Christ. That's all I can really tell you for sure.

[nrajeff]

Originally Posted by Libby

Yes, I get your point, Jeff.
Is that what you do on these boards most of the time?
Not meaning to sound accusing. I'm just saying, I don't think any of us are completely above it (saved or not).

----What I do most of the time is point OUT the mocking. When I am not doing that, I am usually pointing out fallacious logic behind the accusations.
Is what I do evangelizing? Of course not. I never made any pretensions otherwise.

What ARE we doing here? lol <sigh>

---I think you are aware of what goes on here and at the other place. And it's about as close to proclaiming the good news, as the Muppet Show is.

Seriously, I've been asking myself that quite a lot, lately. I'm not sure I'm knowledgable enough about the truth, myself, to be lecturing others on the truth.

---That is a very commendable thing to say.

I do have an abiding faith in Jesus Christ. That's all I can really tell you for sure.

---I believe you, and I have no intention of mocking your faith. I wish more people would just make the POSITIVE profession or confession that you just did, and leave out the negativity.

[Libby]

Originally Posted by nrajeff

----What I do most of the time is point OUT the mocking. When I am not doing that, I am usually pointing out fallacious logic behind the accusations.
Is what I do evangelizing? Of course not. I never made any pretensions otherwise.

That's what I mean, though. You seem to be wanting others to simply evangelize (bring the Good News) but that's not what you do, either. Also, you clearly do not like Calvinism. I think you like it even less than some here like Mormonism.

---I think you are aware of what goes on here and at the other place. And it's about as close to proclaiming the good news, as the Muppet Show is.

Hey, the Muppet Show is entertaining, at least. I know what goes on. Some good, some not so good, IMO...both sides.

---That is a very commendable thing to say.

Thanks. Just being honest.

---I believe you, and I have no intention of mocking your faith. I wish more people would just make the POSITIVE profession or confession that you just did, and leave out the negativity.

That would be nice, but I don't think it would stimulate much conversation. I really believe it's okay to have honest differences...and even discuss them. It's just that if we are all professing Christians, it would be nice to remember to keep Christ in the conversations.

[Father_JD]

Originally Posted by jennieblue22

The scriptural p***age in question was addressed in a previous post with a proper response; the last post to which you replied was in reference to your failure to properly answer to that response.

And just when was it addressed...especially by you? I demonstrated that Romans 9 is NOT teaching about God "not necessarily choosing" but His election (which measn CHOOSING) of Jacob over Esau...his choosing of Moses over Pharoah...His choosing some and NOT choosing others because election is not based upon the "one who runs after it...or wills it", but strictly upon God who shows mercy. You Mos are amazing. It's you guys who don't respond, and then project your failure onto those who DO prove their cases. I wonder what psychologists would say about typical Mormon behavior!

mod edit - No personal attacks

[Father_JD]

Originally Posted by jennieblue22

??!!?!?! All i ***erted was that God doesn't necessarily do all that He is capable of (or even all that He says He is capable of doing) - that's not in contradiction with ANYTHING given, nor is it "twisting" any scriptural p***age - how is it that YOU don't comprehend?!

It's directly in contradiction with Romans 9...a chapter which is apparently "sealed" from any comprehension on your part.

[Father_JD]

It's not a case of making people "ashamed" of their beliefs, jeff. It IS a case of loving you enough to tell you the TRUTH: You've believed a LIE called, "Mormonism".

[Mesenja]

Rebeka was told by the Lord that "Two nations are in thy womb" not that God hated the individual Esau but Jacob I loved.

Genesis 25:23

23 And the Lord said unto her [Rebeka] Two nations are in thy womb,and two manner of people shall be separated from thy bowels;and the one people shall be stronger than the other people;and the elder shall serve the younger.

Malachi used the names Jacob and Esau in a metaphoric sense to refer to the nations of Israel and Edom as was common practice to do so.

Genesis 36:1,8,16
1 Now these are the generations of Esau,who is Edom.
• • •
8 Thus dwelt Esau in mount Seir:Esau is Edom.

Jeremiah 30:10
10 ¶ Therefore fear thou not,O my servant Jacob,saith the Lord;neither be dismayed,O Israel:for,lo,I will save thee from afar,and thy seed from the land of their captivity;and Jacob shall return,and shall be in rest,and be quiet,and none shall make him afraid.

Amos 1:11
11 ¶ Thus saith the Lord;For three transgressions of Edom,and for four,I will not turn away the punishment thereof;because he did pursue his brother with the sword,and did cast off all pity,and his anger did tear perpetually,and he kept his wrath for ever:

Obadiah 1:10,12
10 ¶ For thy violence against thy brother Jacob shame shall cover thee,and thou shalt be cut off for ever.
• • •
12 But thou shouldest not have looked on the day of thy brother in the day that he became a stranger;neither shouldest thou have rejoiced over the children of Judah in the day of their destruction;neither shouldest thou have spoken proudly in the day of distress.

Paul is referring to two nations just as it was written when he quotes Malachi and says “Jacob I loved and Esau I hated”.

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

[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.