Results 1 - 4 of 4
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | LEFT BEHIND? | Bible general Archive 1 | Morant61 | 60087 | ||
Greetings John! Allow me to touch upon both passages! 1) 1 Cor. 2:14: I think this is a good example of where you are hearing something that the other camp is not actually saying. Arminians do not believe that regeneration depends upon the will of man. Arminians believe that atonement was made for all men on the cross. Thus, it is a finished act. The only role that man's will has to play in salvation is whether or not to accept or reject the gift of salvation. I realize we will probably never see this passage the same, I just wanted to point out that it does not say that those who do not have the Spirit of God can never have the Spirit of God. It only says that those who do not have the Spirit cannot understand God's wisdom. The Corinthians were in the same position prior to their reception of the Holy Spirit, but that changed when they received the Spirit of God. Note also that v. 12 says that they had received the Spirit of God. 'Received' is active in voice, not passive. So, if prior to receiving the Holy Spirit, one cannot 'respond' to God's grace. How did the Corinthians receive God's Spirit? If unconditional election were true, one would expect this passage to say that they were 'given' or passively 'received' the Spirit, not that they actively 'received' the Spirit. The result of their receiving the Holy Spirit (v. 12) was that they could understand the wisdom of God, but they had to receive the Spirit first. 2) Rom. 11:2 I do not to correct a point in my previous post. The word 'foreknow' is only used twice in Paul's writings, but five times in all. Sorry! :-) It is obviously your right to not agree with my position my friend. :-) However, I would hesitate to call it an 'unwarrented imposition'. Let's look at the flow of the passage. a) Rom. 10:21 is speaking of the nation of Israel. They are described as "disobedient and obstinate people" in contrast to the Gentiles who had accepted the message. b) Rom. 11:1 immediately asks, "Did God reject His people"? Which people had just been mentioned? Israel. c) Rom. 11:1 answers Paul's question by pointing out that he himself is an Israelite. d) Rom. 11:2 refers to "His people" again. Which people? The same as mentioned in 10:21 and 11:1 - Israel. e) Rom. 11:2-6 then goes on to illustrate from Elijah's time that there was always a remnant of believers even when most had turned their backs on God. So too now, there is a remnant of grace. f) Rom. 11:7-10 then addresses the question of the status of those (the bulk of Israel) who had not obtained grace. They have been hardened and are contrasted with the elect. g) Rom. 11:11-12 then makes the case that they have been hardened that the Gentiles might be saved. h) However, Rom. 11:13-32 goes on to make the case that those who have been hardened can be grafted in again, if they do not continue in their unbelief. So, has God rejected Israel (His people whom He has foreknown)? From the context of the passage, the answer is no. So, I would not call this an 'unwarrented imposition', since the only people mentioned in the context prior to v. 2 is the nation of Israel! ;-) Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
2 | The "branches" of Romans 11 | Bible general Archive 1 | Reformer Joe | 60189 | ||
Tim (and my fellow Christian observers): I have been studying Romans 11 myself this month, and I was wondering precisely whom you hold the "branches" to be. Do you think branches represent individuals, or do they represent the collectives of Jews and Gentiles? Paul and the Jewish believers are obviously in some way represented by the "natural branches" still on the tree. And Romans 11:2 does refer to Israel in general, although it should be plain to the evangelical mind that while He has not rejected Israel wholesale, he goes on to specify a REMNANT of the nation that He has kept for Himself, not the entirety of Jacob's descendents. Aside from Elijah and the 7000, there was a lot of rejection going on. I hold that the branches do not refer to individuals, because natural branches will be grafted back in (implying that they were there before) after the fulness of the Gentiles has been grafted in (Romans 11:25). Individual Jews living today were not born "grafted in." Now for my Calvinist jab (since we have not danced this little rumba in a while, my non-TULIPy brother): does the "all Israel" in verse 26 refer to "every single Israelite"? Have fun! --Joe! |
||||||
3 | The "branches" of Romans 11 | Bible general Archive 1 | prayon | 60198 | ||
Greetings, Many have had problems with the illustration of the olive tree with it's rejected and newly grafted branches. Many of these problems come from trying to go beyond the simple point of the illustration. If we think of the broken off branches as individuals, we introduce the thought of a person's salvation being lost, which contradicts Paul's teaching else where. However, if we think of the branches as nations, Israel is replaced by Gentile nations and we end up thinking that there is some degree of Gentile supremacy. These problems can be eliminated if we understand that Paul is not referring to individuals or nations specifically but only about the masses of Jews and many Gentiles. What he is getting at is most Jews have not believed in Jesus and are therefore cut off from the spiritual blessings that should be theirs because they are Jews. On the other hand the Gentiles, who have no claim on the spiritual blessings granted to Israel have nevertheless entered into those blessing by faith in Jesus. Hope this helps. (taken from BSF study notes)prayon |
||||||
4 | The "branches" of Romans 11 | Bible general Archive 1 | Reformer Joe | 60276 | ||
I agree completely. I am encouraged to see how Bible Study Fellowship has been a benefit to you! --Joe! |
||||||