The Context of Romans 9 🤯

Dr. Leighton Flowers, Director of Evangelism and Apologetics for Texas Baptists, discusses the context of one of most debated passages in scripture (Romans 9) with special guest Scott Mitchell, author of "Rediscovering Romans 9: How Calvinism Distorts The Nature And Character Of God"
Check out Scott's book here: www.amazon.com...
Watch the full interview here: • How Calvinism Distorts...

[@jesuschrististruth3731]

Thank you Mr Flowers. I remember when I first listen to this calvinism vs Arminianism debate in my early years of being saved, I was shocked not knowing how God worked in actually saving someone. I didn't want calvinism to be true but I eventually came to believe it. You were actually one of the guys I was listening to, against calvinism. But now I'm here to say, I have revised and reviewed my position and say I am no longer a calvinist.

[@tomtemple69]

so you have confirmation bias?

[@fumples4080]

I had a discussion with a Determinist just yesterday on Romans 9 and I wasn't swayed but just the fact that this video has been uploaded right after I had that discussion is truly miraculous

[@everytingYay]

@Sir Isaac Newton And what does Hebrew 11 says? "But without faith it is impossible to please God"

[@jordandthornburg]

@Sir Isaac Newton That seems very wrong man. Abraham was saved by faith. God didn’t change that just for the Israelites

[@jordandthornburg]

@Sir Isaac Newton because Paul said Abraham was saved by faith. Yes he had a covenant with Israel but that wasn’t for individual salvation it was for the blessings as a nation and much of that was their national laws. And I’m not a Calvinist, I have no idea what you’re talking about. You should think more before you speak next time.

[@jordandthornburg]

@Sir Isaac Newton I said im not a Calvinist. Can you not read?

[@djohnson3093]

Nobody was saved by works in the old or new testaments. The law was not able to save.

[@dw6528]

N.T. Wright jokingly calls Romans 9 - "The Calvinist's happy hunting ground". That pretty much explains it! :-D

[@jerrystatic256]

Leighton dropping truth 💣 's!!

[@nachoooooo800]

It’s official, they hired a thumbnail guy

[@brendaboykin3281]

Thanx, Leighton🌹🌹🌹

[@ClarkAboudaz]

God wouldn't need long suffering if the elect are predetermined and irresistibly come to Him.

[@reecebaptista4074]

That thumbnail is... 😁😊😀😂

[@DeplorableNeanderthal]

Salt Bae!

[@fredmiller6166]

A wonderful 15 minutes. Very well articulated!

[@grahck4391]

One of my biggest pet peeves about Calvinism and Romans 9 is the quote from Malachi "Jacob I loved and Esau I hated". If you research the history, the nation of Edom rebelled against God and betrayed Israel to their enemies. They earned God's hatred as a result where as Israel eventually repented.

[@robroy4058]

God hated Esau before he was born though.

[@grahck4391]

@@robroy4058 Book, Chapter, and Verse please? If you're referring to Malachi 1, then reread what I said above. Better yet, read Malachi chapter 1 for yourself. Malachi isn't referring to Esau the person, who was Isaac's son and Jacob's twin brother. He was referring to the nation of Edom, the descendants of Esau. If you do any research on the nation of Edom, you'll find that when Israel and Judah were facing extinction from the Assyrian and Babylonian Empires respectively, Edom stood against their sister nation rather than standing with them. As a result, they earned God's wrath and he wiped them out. Furthermore, Esau's own words in Genesis 33 speaks to the exact opposite when he praises God for being gracious to him. So, NO ... God didn't hate "Esau" before he was born. When studying the Bible, remember that Context is king ... a lesson that Calvinists need to learn.

[@robroy4058]

@@grahck4391 romans 9. It says before they were born so Gods purpose of election will stand.

[@grahck4391]

@@robroy4058 AAANNNDD ... what does the context say? Does it say that God hated Esau before either of them were born? Is that the context of Romans 9? Or is it talking about descendents of Abraham being more than those who are physically born of Abraham? Go ahead and take your time to reread Romans 9 again. I'll wait.

[@robroy4058]

@@grahck4391 I know its about a nation not the individual. But it was because of Gods choice, not mans. What did Jacob do that was any better than Esau? Jacob was a sinful man but God redeemed Him by His choice.God Choose Jacob, and Jacob believed in God.

[@jonathans.219]

That was the best thumbnail of all time 😂

[@princeamoakwa4057]

Happy to see Scott highlight the evangelical aspect of the 10 plagues and other acts of God through Moses in Egypt. God was rebuking the Egyptians and their "colonies" and drawing them to worship the original and almighty God: Yahweh. Rahab of Jericho confirmed this.

[@dragonore2009]

Gee, I hope I win the Calvinist lottery if Calvinism were true.

[@scottthong9274]

Romans 1-8: Jews and Gentiles, Jews and Gentiles, Jews and Gentiles. Calvinist take on Romans 9: Individual salvation and damnation. Romans 10 onwards: Back to Jews and Gentiles.

[@HolyMolysDonutShop]

I agree Scott. It's like they went off road to make this point too. That happens quite often. Pick one verse or chapter in a sea of scripture and run in a complete different direction as if it disproves contrary passages. If anything it makes the bible inconsistent which they won't agree with. Let's just ignore the inconsistencies!

[@andrewadler4576]

Yes it's Individual ... Romans 9 says God will have mercy on whom He Wills ..

[@HolyMolysDonutShop]

@@andrewadler4576 uhh no it's not separate. And of course he does but the text gives to us plainly on whom He hardens and whom He gives mercy.

[@andrewadler4576]

@@HolyMolysDonutShop Yes , Hardens are the children of flesh and mercy are the children of promise.

[@HolyMolysDonutShop]

@@andrewadler4576 yeah I know. Not sure what point you're making though. Chapter 9 fits in the whole of Romans collectively.

[@JStevensdk7]

The context is Roman's 7:1, Paul is writing to those who "know the law", converted Jews. In Romans 8 Paul explains many of the blessings and benefits of those saved in Christ and our future glorification. Right at that moment it hits Paul who will not be receiving those blessings. Thus Paul with a heavy heart explains to those converted Jews chapters 9-11 why the mass majority of their fellow brethren missed the Messiah and what that meant, was God done with Israel, could they come back? Paul is talking to Jews about Jews. The interlocutor in Roman's 9 is the converted Jews. Romans 9 is not about all of humanity, the vessels of wrath and mercy are from the same lump of clay, the Jewish nation IE Jeremiah 18. When you have this proper context and understanding, then one can never equate Jacob and Esau, vessels of wrath and mercy to all of humanity and not the supposed elect and reprobate.

[@ofhismercy109]

So interesting. I am going to read these chapters from this perspective. Not to say I believe the Calvinists interpretation....or ever did.

[@ofhismercy109]

I just finished reading Roman's 7 through 11. It is very clear when you pay attention to the audience. 11 I say then, Hath God cast away his people? God forbid. For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin. 2 God hath not cast away his people which he foreknew. Wot ye not what the scripture saith of Elias? how he maketh intercession to God against Israel saying, Even the only part which might be confusing where the author spoke of the elect, and those whom God foreknew, is cleared up here in Rom 11:2 where the author specifies who were the ones God foreknew.....it is His elect, the Jews. Not the church. Thank you for pointing this out!

[@jimmygray3452]

Paul was the apostle to the gentiles, and even says as much in Romans 11 as he speaks directly to gentiles. He even includes gentiles in his closing of Romans 9 as being included in the vessels of mercy group, whom have been grafted into the olive tree, and as he elaborates on in the following chapters. The early church was comprised of both Jew and gentile, so it'd make sense especially as a Jew himself, that he'd feel free to address both groups in his letter.

[@jimmygray3452]

BTW, I'm not a Calvinist, and I agree that Paul's thrust in Romans 9 is mainly about what God did with Israel through judicial hardening and the cross, and not about some sort of doctrine of unconditional election. But I had to chime in because near the end of Romans 9 and in the following chapters, Paul lays out the implications for gentiles as well as Jews now that God chooses to have mercy on all through the cross and to regard those who have faith in Jesus as chosen/elect by His grace, while also still keeping His electing love set on Israel on behalf of their forefathers.

[@JStevensdk7]

@@jimmygray3452 Paul switches his focus or directed comments to different groups in Roman's, please READ Roman's 7:1, gentile converts did not know the law, so clearly Romans 7 and on are directed or focused towards those who Paul STATES he is directing his comments towards, Jewish converts. Thus in Romans 9 the interlocutor who Paul is conversing with is the Jewish converts. Feel free to click in my name, find my video on Calvinism then find my blog articles on Roman's 9 in the description.

[@aarons1789]

How anyone can still believe Romans 9 is about Calvinism after seeing this view is flabbergasting. The only explanation is pride.

[@danielomitted1867]

At what point in this video did they actually walk through Romans 9?

[@aarons1789]

@@danielomitted1867 They were discussing the correct view that people have walked through plenty of times in the past. Calvinists who think you are supposed read ANY scripture, especially Romans 9 which quotes the OT repeatedly, without getting the full Bible context are delusional and show they are just committed to holding onto a series of false doctrines out of pride instead of genuinely trying to understand the Word of God.

[@danielomitted1867]

@@aarons1789 well I understand when Paul writes Gods mercy is not in the basis human will it exertion it means precisely that. According to provisionism Gods mercy is entirely dependent on human will. If youre not willing to you cant reserve Gods mercy. Calvinism states Gods mercy makes us willing.

[@dralgarza]

We need to really start looking at Romans 7:1 first. "Or do you not know, brothers-for I am speaking to those who know the Torah (Jews)-that the Torah is binding on a person only as long as he lives?" It sets up the context all the way to Romans 11:13 like bookends. "Now I am speaking to you Gentiles. Inasmuch then as I am an apostle to the Gentiles, I magnify my ministry..." Romans 7, 8, 9, 10, are speaking to Jews and Greek-Jews. We see this in Romans 8:4 "in order that the righteous requirement of the TORAH might be fulfilled in us, who walk not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit." The Torah was not for the Gentiles. Please consider the context starting at Romans 7. Thanks.

[@sonofglory7029]

7 was talking about how the law was powerless to change man 8 talks about the Spirit making a change in people evidence is 8:1-3. 9 is the beginning of paul talking about the nation of Israel in terms of salvation.

[@dralgarza]

@@sonofglory7029 Sorry, read my post carefully.

[@robertleitzel756]

Always a good point Dr. Al

[@andrewadler4576]

Don't you think that the Potter and the clay is everyone ... Romans 9 is about Jews and gentiles .

[@dralgarza]

@@andrewadler4576 No, I don’t believe the Potter and Clay are everyone. Paul referenced Jeremiah knowing the Jews would understand what he was saying about Israel and Judah. The Gentiles are mentioned with Israel as a nation in Romans 9:24-30. Paul then quotes Hosea and Isaiah to prove his point.

[@Mike-hr6jz]

Context is king Great video

[@yvonnedoulos8873]

Thank you for this clip! Appreciated his points and have ordered his book.

[@HolyMolysDonutShop]

I actually had a discussion with someone I would assume was a Calvinist that said Paul thought it foolish to think he loves Israel more than God I guess trying to make the argument that God didn't love Israel as much as we thought through Paul. I didn't see that in the text. Calvinist have a tendency to be deceptive. Some cases it's intentional and others it's not. Still deceptive nonetheless

[@matthewwilliamson484]

Absolutely agree with most of that clip but one thing is. Esau did not loose salvation. He lost his birthright and inheritance. Neither of those things comes into play with justification

[@Demitriavelo]

If you are interested in a more thorough explanation of Romans 9:1-33 with their same perspectives I recommend “When Will God Give up on Us?” by Dr. Gerry Breshears. He explains this far better than I could in a response.

[@matthewwilliamson484]

@@Demitriavelo thanks. The church has lost the difference in justification, sanctification and glorification. And the difference between the early millennial kingdom and the heavenly part. Also the promises to Israel the church are different on set earthly Ie the covenants ie ephesians 1 v 3

[@livinginprophetictimeswith3507]

Thank u

[@louisjordan4702]

Romans 9 scares the daylights out of just about everyone.

[@contemplate-Matt.G]

I think I've figured it out ....after 20 years

[@joserivera8429]

The thumbnail 🤣

[@corinneperegrini6003]

I thank you for your ministry as it helps me grow in understanding of the Word of God. What I don't understand and feel very unconfortable and not at peace with...is your needs to sale marchandises and answer questions for money (super chat)...it seems so unbiblical.... May I suggest...you need to stop asking for financial support too... it doesn't sound good and could come accross as you're doing this youtube channel for money. I realise this passage below was to the apostle specifically...how ever...we can learn from it. If this youtube ministry was truly God's will for you to do, than God will provide, you don't have to worry about asking for financial support my brother. Take the lead of Pastor Mike Winger on his youtube ministry, he never ask for money for himself and God is sustaining him and his ministry. Shalom "These twelve Jesus sent out and commanded them, saying: “Do not go into the way of the Gentiles, and do not enter a city of the Samaritans. But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. And as you go, preach, saying, ‘The kingdom of heaven is at hand.’ Heal the sick, cleanse the lepers, raise the dead, cast out demons. Freely you have received, freely give. Provide neither gold nor silver nor copper in your money belts, nor bag for your journey, nor two tunics, nor sandals, nor staffs; for a worker is worthy of his food. Matthew 10:5‭-‬10 NKJV" Ps: one more thing...if people gives you money through super chat to have their name appears on the screen...to be seen...than they 're doing it for the wrong raisons... "But when you do a charitable deed, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing, that your charitable deed may be in secret; and your Father who sees in secret will Himself reward you openly. Matthew 6:3‭-‬4 NKJV"

[@tedrohe9048]

Great discussion and teaching.

[@TheNewYorker7899]

The thumbnail 😂💀

[@no1djkb]

I have to say, this guest was awesome!!!

[@J0e1.]

The amount of mental and semantic gymnastics from people against calvanist is mind blowing. John piper give shis explanation verse by verse. And here u have these blokes talking in general with their personal views as the main theme.

[@ofhismercy109]

Help me understand, what nations do Jacob and Esau represent? I am not clear.....

[@robertleitzel756]

Traditionally Jacob represented the Jews and Esau the Gentiles, but in Romans 9 Paul is actually reversing these identities in order to shock his unbelieving Jewish audience.

[@ofhismercy109]

@@robertleitzel756 ok, thank you. I'll have to read through it again and see if this sheds any light.

[@robertleitzel756]

@@ofhismercy109 so, it’s going to be complicated if you don’t have a Jewish background like Paul does or at least a strong understanding of Jewish thinking and teaching. Romans 9 is Paul’s recapping of his past arguments with unbelieving Jews. But most Christian theologians miss ALL of Paul’s points. For example, in Rom 9:3 Paul says he wishes he could be cut off for the sake of his brethren. Most Christian theologians read this and teach. ‘Aww, isn’t that nice? Doesn’t Paul have such a good heart?’ But that’s not at all what the Jews would have heard. In Exodus Moses says this about the Jews who are acting badly. So when Paul says it he’s basically saying the Jews are acting badly and I’m like Moses. But the Jews in Paul’s time saw Paul as a traitor to their religion, not their leader/savior/prophet. When Paul says I wish… we see it as nice feelings but they would have been incensed! This same type of thing goes on all throughout Romans 9. Paul keeps bringing up OT texts and changing the roles around and it gets missed over and over again by Christian teachers.

[@ofhismercy109]

@@robertleitzel756 yes, it really gains more meaning even understanding a little more. I saw his audience was both regenerated Jews (the letter is addressed to)and is regarding unregenerate Jews in the passage (chpt 7 through 11) and I know nothing of the OT. I have been a Christian for almost 30 years and was never taught to read the bible in this way. Just seeking to understand who the audience is has answered so many questions scripture raises in me. At the same time, not having a church upbringing protected me from so many false doctrines like Calvinism. I appreciate you sharing your insight very much.

[@rightmatt]

@@robertleitzel756 is that like in Galatians, when Paul uses Sarah and Hagar as an allegory… but switches it around so the Judiasers are Hagar/slaves and the free/Sarah are the believers in Christ? Same method of switching things around to grab the Jews attention?

[@claudecharest7018]

It's a joke . What ever the context , God choses who He wants and Gives Grace to who He wants (Rom. and Phil 1;28 ) . He choses Abraham , Mosus, Hebrews , David , Elijah , 7000 men , John The baptist, Mary, Paul a instrument , Peter and the apostles ( it's not you who chosen me ) and me and you ,the fools of this world ( 1 Cor.) before the foundation of the world , and the 144000 ( i don't think they are born at this moment ) at the end according to revelation .Be grateful that you have been chosen . We were all , with no exception ,children of wrath but because His Love He saves all those that the Father gaveth to Him John 17 ( Remember Jesus didn't pray for the world but only those they were given to Him)

[@wretch1]

'Already rebellious' / 'hardened by God' Leighton always misses this.

[@Treetop01]

No lol your heart gets hardened because of sin... read hebrews.

[@jm505]

You’d be right, if not for the fact that Flowers produced an entire video on the topic.

[@tomtemple69]

he ignores romans 3 lol

[@wretch1]

I agree on all points up to the pharaoh bit. God clearly raised pharaoh up for the purpose which pharaoh brought about by his decisions in line with God's hardening. 'Raised him up' as opposed to 'reacted to his previous self hardening'. This is the only part of your Interpretation of Romans 9 that differs with calvinism.

[@soundwaynes3885]

why would God harden someone's heart when its already depraved in he first place? is it to make sure that those heart cant become soft enough to believe?

[@edwinnunez7538]

@@soundwaynes3885 it’s so that he wouldn’t let God’s people go, in order to accomplish God’s purpose. Pharaoh wouldn’t have let the people go because he would’ve loved God and desired to honor and obey him, he would’ve done it to save his own skin, hence why he is still depraved and a natural born sinner in need of God’s regenerating grace

[@veritas2145]

The jews were not all Israel. Only the 2 tribes of the House of Judah(Judah and Benjamin).

[@Debating_Truth]

Jesus is my salvation

[@wretch1]

'Hardened'!! 'Hardened'!!

[@falconguy4768]

Thanks nice

[@UltraAar]

just debate James White already

[@juanlmontejo]

He already did

[@UltraAar]

@@juanlmontejo and he should again he clearly has a crush on him

[@juanlmontejo]

@@edmcfall3519In the debate he managed to show the same issue related to this video, the context of Roman 9 and how calvinism does an eisegesis to that text. The issue of who won the debate is relative

[@wretch1]

People are without excuse because they are sinners and rebels against God, not because they are ignorant. You guys always miss the fact that man will not have God in his thoughts.

[@BobCatDirect]

So is Leighton saying romans 9 is dealing with salvation? Albeit in a non Calvinistic way. Because in other videos he says it’s dealing with being chosen for service, or in his words, chosen to be “a blessing to others”. It seems he will take any view as long as it opposes the Calvinistic view. Say what you want about the Calvinistic view, at least it’s agreed upon by the majority, it seems as though the anti Calvinistic camp can’t quite agree upon what it actually means.

[@joebrowser775]

If Calvinism is true then I guess all of Israel is saved, I mean, didn’t God *choose* Israel as His people? Also, if Calvinism is true then why is there a warning in Revelations 3:5 of God being able to erase names from the Book of Life and then again in 22:19? I mean, if God already chose those who will be saved and their names are written in the Book I guess God would know better than anyone who would overcome and who wouldn’t take away words from His prophesy.

[@wretch1]

Acts 4:23-28 When they were released, they went to their friends and reported what the chief priests and the elders had said to them. And when they heard it, they lifted their voices together to God and said, “Sovereign Lord, who made the heaven and the earth and the sea and everything in them, who through the mouth of our father David, your servant, said by the Holy Spirit, “‘Why did the Gentiles rage, and the peoples plot in vain? The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers were gathered together, against the Lord and against his Anointed’- for truly in this city there were gathered together against your holy servant Jesus, whom you anointed, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, along with the Gentiles and the peoples of Israel, to do whatever your hand and your plan had predestined to take place.

[@treysmith5513]

True God did predestinate Jesus crucifixion, does not mean that God forced the people to do it. How did Jesus get himself crucified? By saying things like "you must eat my flesh and drink my blood or the truth is not in you."

[@everytingYay]

I think Charles Spurgeon's view on this topic is sound. That every man that will go to hell, will be punished for their sins, and will go there because of their own sins. God condemns them because of their sins, not because God sent them there. He also asserts that it is damnable heresy to even suggest that God sends people to hell by Himself. On the other hand, every man that will go to heaven is solely because of God. God graciously saves sinners. We were dead in sin, but God! Read Ephesians 2. Nonetheless, everything occurs according to God's providence. Edit: @Jonathan Grandt I get your point, and I agree. Though, what I meant was that God doesn't make people sin by decree, or by any means. The sins of men are their own and God does not have a hand in their rebellion against Him. On the other hand, salvation is God's alone. He saves however He wills.

[@JonathanGrandt]

Not so damnable. Obviously the angels toss the wicked in...at someone’s command.

[@Liftercode]

Does God will to Save everybody or few?

[@everytingYay]

@@Liftercode God saves however He wills to save, all for His glory

[@Liftercode]

@@everytingYay thats not answer... Whats the Biblie day everybody or some?

[@tomparker3827]

Agree brother. 10000000%

[@CraigThomas2070]

Should I avoid marrying a Calvinist woman?

[@everythingisvanityneverthe1834]

:-) How determined are you to marry her

[@dw6528]

I would not if it were me. Calvinism not only entails a radical theology It entails a different way of thinking because its foundational core is radical. And Calvinism also entails a much more entrenched social structure You may find you didn't marry her alone You may find you also married the pastor and the elders of her church at the same time. It depends on how serious her Calvinism and her Calvinist church is to her. if she is - then you will be in a perennial battle with Calvinists in her church trying to ensnare you into Calvinism's DOUBLE-MINDED world

[@CraigThomas2070]

@@everythingisvanityneverthe1834 was pretty set on asking her this week. Then I read Bob Kirkland's book "none dare call it heresy". When I spoke to her last night she became very defensive and emotional. Now I am just not sure I should.

[@CraigThomas2070]

@@dw6528 when meeting her parents....or should I say during the interview process, I was grilled ruthlessly, in an almost cruel way. I get frequent texts from her mom still to this day and there is this two faced theme to them. Like she is following a script when using scripture to push me toward the ideology. Girlfriend cannot explain why she is Calvinist, she rattles off what she has been taught. No inner thought. I am disappointed. I dont think she will allow me to be a spiritual leader to her in marriage. I have the ring. We are flying to my hometown this week. I was going to ask. I dont know now. Complicating my life seems foolish.

[@dw6528]

@@CraigThomas2070 I'm sorry to hear that! And the fact that she is confused and doesn't know what she has been taught doesn't surprise me at all. Calvinism is an authoritarian social structure. So if you do get married - you'll want to prepare yourself for that. Finding a job in a location where there is no Calvinist church could save an otherwise unbearable marriage situation. The critically important thing is - you are aware of what is going on in the Calvinist social structure and how it attempts to lure people into its grip. So at least you will not be drawn into its DOUBLE-SPEAK belief system Unless its authoritarian social structure can wear down your defenses and bring your mind under its subjection.

[@johna3734]

Thumbnail. 💯

[@dustinpaulson1123]

lol at salt bae Flowers

[@dustinpaulson1123]

Baeghton Flowers

[@redfaux74]

That was juicy.... ❤

[@baskatz3443]

For your next thumbnail can you post the type of pretzel into which James White will contort himself in response to this?

[@ShepherdMinistry]

I’d highly suggest you search for the video titled “James white Romans 9 exegesis”. He explains exactly why it’s about individual salvation. “The Justification of God” by John Piper is a GREAT academic book explaining why it’s NOT about nations and it is about individual salvation.

[@andrewadler4576]

Hey Leighton don't you get bored dealing with Calvinism ....

[@jeremymace8671]

I don’t think his main goal is for the channel his own entertainment. So I don’t think he does it because it changes his level of entertainment or boredom.

[@edrash1]

Synergism is cringe

[@danielomitted1867]

Leightons Romans 9 debate was incredible. He explained Romans 9 by not actually going through Romans 9 and running off to every other piece of scripture he prefers. Edit: just finished watching the video. Not surprised thats more or less what they did here. Lot of talk about how Pharoah hardened himself without even acknowledging the application Paul made within Romans 9 itself. Didnt acknowledge the reason God both raised up and hardened Pharoah was so that his power would be made known. Provisionists are utterly incapable of dealing with this chapter.

[@josephthomasmusic]

That doesn't contradict his point. It goes perfectly still with provisionism. God makes His power known, hence why Pharaoh finally gave in to letting the Israelites go. Remember though that Pharaoh hardened his heart FIRST, so the Lord further hardened his heart. Again judicial hardening. Very basic stuff, brother.

[@danielomitted1867]

@@josephthomasmusic Well thats wonderful conjecture. Has absolutely nothing to do with the point Pauls making though. What relevance does Pharaoh have to what Paul just said about Jacob and Esau? Its about Gods choice, its the focus of Pauls attention. To segue to Pharoah he anticipates a certain complaint from the reader "is there injustice on Gods part", funny thats always the rejection Calvinists are getting. "He says to Moses I will have mercy on whom I will and compassion on whom I will. It depends not on human will or exertion but on God who has mercy". Again its all about Gods choice. You guys can going on about how "well Pharoah hardened himself first" but its completely aside the point Paul is trying to make. Again notice once again Paul anticipates a rebuttal he will receive for saying this. "Why does God still find fault, who can resist his will?" Paul doesnt answer this by saying "yeah well Pharaoh hardened himself first so its fine" his answer is God has the right to make vessals of honorable and dishonorable use and you have no right to answer back to God "why have you made me like this"? Then it circles back to Gods choice in election in regards to Jew and Gentile, quoting from Hosea. In otherwords this passage has Calvinism written all over it, which is why Leighton can never just read it straight through. He takes bits and pieces and reads his own narrative into it.

[@signposts6189]

I'm glad you noticed how Flowers rarely explains the passages he is dealing with. Reading one's own interpretations of passages from one book into another passage in the Bible is still eisegesis not exegesis window dressed with some analogy. But I'm sure it sounds nice and biblical.

[@josephthomasmusic]

@@danielomitted1867 sounds like you aren't familiar with the Jewish context of Romans 9:00 to 11. Romans 9 is about Israel's past, Romans 10 is about Israel's present, and Romans 11 is about Israel's future. It's funny how you said it's strictly only about God's choice and that Pharaoh has nothing to do with it but Pharaoh has everything to do with it. Feral hardened his heart first so therefore God saw that pharaoh made the choice to harden his heart and then did a practice that is called judicial hardening, were you harden the person's heart further to serve your own purposes. To say that God cannot allow a person to make their own decision first has everything to do with it. If God has the right to give us libertarian free will, at least enough where we can either choose God or reject him on our own volition and not by some preconditioned nature that God gave us, then that is perfectly within God's prerogative to do so. Honestly a lot of you Calvinists have a very low view of God where God absolutely needs to be in control of every person's decision in order for the glory to go to him. What makes you think that giving mankind libertarian Free Will doesn't give God glory at all? If God can make that happen, then he certainly has the power to do so. To say that he can't do that is an extremely low view of god. Remember who the audience is in Romans 9 to 11. Paul clearly says that the people he's talking to are the people who know the law and have the law, namely the jews. So Paul is talking to the Jews in all three of those passages. It is not until Romans 11:13 I believe that he says that now he is talking to the gentiles. So he's not talking to just anybody he's talking to the people who believe that they are chosen by God simply by heritage and simply by having the law. And you're right that Paul is saying that God can save whomever he wants to save. But remember what he said about the Jews which is that by election they are praised by the patriarchs but by the gospel they are enemies. Which means that Paul is drawing a clear distinction between election and the gospel. He's not saying that they're the same thing he's saying that they are two separate things. Got elected Israel to play the part of his initial evangelist to the world. Then the second step of his plan was to preach the gospel to the rest of the world the gentiles. This is not universalism because not all people will choose God because they still have the free will to choose whether or not they accept his sacrifice. You cannot throw the charge of universalism on non-calvinists because that does not apply whatsoever. Universalism assumes that mankind is not just, which you and I both know is completely unbiblical. The only thing that is universal is the amount of people that God chooses to offer salvation to. Salvation is offered to everyone but that doesn't mean that all people will choose salvation through Christ. A lot of them will choose salvation in themselves. Let's be realistic here brother. Tulip is not biblical. It's pagan determinism.

[@danielomitted1867]

@@josephthomasmusic lol buddy literally everything i said came from the relevant texts, going straight through it. Nothing you did is, all youre doing is pushing your own conjecture. Paul said word for word "depends not on human will or exhertion". You believe its entirely dependent on human will. You people cannot simply read the text straight through. You treat it like some puzzle that needs to be solved.