Paul created Calvanism!!!

[Muffled]

I would like for you to name one of Calvin's premises which didn't have its origins in Paul's letters.

I have to plead ignorance. I have read the biography of Calvin and Presbyteriian beliefs which are based on the writings of Calvin but I have never studied sources of Calvin's theology.

Do you know what Calvin had for an idea of the Gospel? I believe it differs betwen Paul and Jesus.

 

[Simplelogic]

John 6:37-39
37 All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out.

38 For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me.

39 And this is the Father's will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day.

The only ones who come to Jesus are those whom the Father gives?... Jesus created Calvinism!

this text is hardly an affirmation of Calvinist theology

 

[Sultan Of Swing]

this text is hardly an affirmation of Calvinist theology

How do you interpret it, what is Jesus saying here?

 

[Simplelogic]

How do you interpret it, what is Jesus saying here?

that God simply knows his creation intimately.He had a plan and a will for those whom he wanted to reach. This is very different than the concept of God determining people's salvation before their birth as Paul suggests.

 

[Sultan Of Swing]

that God simply knows his creation intimately.He had a plan and a will for those whom he wanted to reach. This is very different than the concept of God determining people's salvation before their birth as Paul suggests.

So you agree there were some God wanted to reach, and some God didn't want to reach? What's the difference between that and salvation? If all whom the Father gives come to Jesus, what of those who do not come?

 

[Simplelogic]

So you agree there were some God wanted to reach, and some God didn't want to reach? What's the difference between that and salvation? If all whom the Father gives come to Jesus, what of those who do not come?

because he chooses US based off of our works and our sincerity of heart. not some preconceived divine election

 

[Simplelogic]

A lot of this discussion pertains to the concept of time. Many believe that YHVH is outside of time and has seen the beginning to the end it complete detail. Though this logic sounds great on the surface, it is completely contrary to the way YHVH operates with humanity. The Hebrew scriptures teach clearly that YHVH is NOT outside of time. Here is a list of scriptures which make this point clear:

"There are many passages in the Bible that indicate God does not necessarily know what man will do. The following are just a few of them. This picture of a creator who chooses tonot know what his creature will do shows up right at the beginning of the Bible in the creation account itself .

"Out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field and every bird of the air, and brought them to Adam to see what he would call them." Genesis 2:19

If God is all-knowing of what man will do, why was He so inquisitive of what Adam would do?

Then the Lord saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. And the Lordregretted that He had made man on the earth, and He was grieved in His heart. So the Lord said, "I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth,... for I regret that I have made them." Genesis 6:5-7

How can a wise God do something that He knows He will regret in the future? This passage clearly implies that, had God known when He created man that he would become as evil as he did, He would not have created him! Thus, He did not know. God knew it was a possibility that man could turn toward ultimate evil. That is part of the risk He took in relinquishing control and giving man a free will. But that is not the same as knowing man would become as evil as he did. God had higher hopes for His creation.

But the Lord came down to see the city and the tower which the sons of men had built. And the Lord said, "Indeed, the people are one and they all have one language..." Genesis 11:5,6

Gathering information again! And obviously, it was information He didn't completely possess before.

And the Lord said, "Because the outcry against Sodom and Gomorrah is great, and because their sin is very grievous, I will go down now and see whether they have done altogether according to the outcry against it that has come to Me; and if not, I will know." Genesis 18:20,21

It sounds like He didn't know for sure and was going on a fact-finding mission again!

But the Angel of the Lord called to him from heaven and said, "Abraham, Abraham!" And he said, "Here I am." And He said, "Do not lay your hand on the lad, or do anything to him; for now I know that you fear God, since you have not withheld your son, your only son, from Me." Genesis 22:11,12

Again, "now I know", as though He wasn't completely sure before.

Now the word of the Lord came to Samuel, saying, "I greatly regret that I have set up Saul as king, for he has turned back from following Me, and has not performed My commandments." 1Samuel 15:11

How can an intelligent God do something He knew He would wish He hadn't done?

"And they built the high places of Baal which are in the Valley of the Son of Hinnom, to cause their sons and their daughters to pass through the fire to Molech, which I did not command them, nor did it come into My mind that they should do this abomination, to cause Judah to sin." Jeremiah 32:35 (see also Jeremiah 7:31 and 19:5)

God said Himself that it never came into His mind!! " Yeshua/Jesus and Judaism versus Paul and Christianity

 

[Sleeppy]

I think most people don't have a problem with YHVH blessing one more than another. Paul takes it much further by suggesting that YHVH hated Esau before he was born!! Do you not see the difference?

BTW. YHVH made this prophecy after Jacob and Esau were conceived and in their mothers belly. He did not make this prophecy before they were conceived.

This may come as a shock, but YHVH is capable at looking at our genetic material in the zygote and rightly choose whom He wants to bless more. See Psalm 139 for more on His ability to do this.

"Most people" don't have anything to do with the truth of a matter. The question is why did God bless one more than the other? And, what was the reason the prophecy was even relayed only to the mother?

Paul was doing the exact same thing that you are doing. You're implying that there is no problem with God blessing one person more than another- neglecting any reasoning behind that.. You then present as a matter of fact, that God looks at genetic material to choose who should be blessed more. Again, no real reasoning behind this. Here are a few reasons why the whole argument doesn't work:

1) Esau and Jacob were twin brothers. If they were identical, they shared the same genetic information. But even if they were fraternal, they shared at least 50% of the same genetic pool (pool, being genes from both parents). So if they were fraternal, sharing more than half of their possible genes, it would not make sense to make prophecies concerning servitude, or absolute statements of love and hate- except only to draw contrast in specific areas. Furthermore, God is God. His laws are what determine reality- including Jacob and Esau's inherited genes. You're assuming that God came along only after they had formed DNA, which effectively diminishes and dishonors His title.

2) You may have overlooked the whole of Psalm 139.

Thine eyes did see mine unformed substance, and in Thy book they were all written-- even the days that were fashioned, when as yet there was none of them.

3) Paul was quoting Malachi, as you are aware. Paul explicitly draws the conclusion that they were blessed and cursed according to God's determination. But, the implicit truth is there. If God made the prophecy before they were born, that the older would serve the younger, when all along the Law and the tradition was the reverse- then according to everything we should know about genetics, and justice, God's determination or prophecy was not a reasonable reaction to His own creation. It was an action, a premeditation, which preceded creation altogether. Refer back to verse 16 of Psalm 139.

 

[Sleeppy]

A lot of this discussion pertains to the concept of time. Many believe that YHVH is outside of time and has seen the beginning to the end it complete detail. Though this logic sounds great on the surface, it is completely contrary to the way YHVH operates with humanity. The Hebrew scriptures teach clearly that YHVH is NOT outside of time.

"Out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field and every bird of the air, and brought them to Adam to see what he would call them." Genesis 2:19

If God is all-knowing of what man will do, why was He so inquisitive of what Adam would do?

Seeing something doesn't negate the possibility that what is being seen had already been seen, or known. -- God asks rhetorical questions all the time. And He's fully aware of the people who will attempt to answer them, and what they will attempt with.

Then the Lord saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. And the Lordregretted that He had made man on the earth, and He was grieved in His heart. So the Lord said, "I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth,... for I regret that I have made them." Genesis 6:5-7

How can a wise God do something that He knows He will regret in the future? This passage clearly implies that, had God known when He created man that he would become as evil as he did, He would not have created him! Thus, He did not know. God knew it was a possibility that man could turn toward ultimate evil. That is part of the risk He took in relinquishing control and giving man a free will. But that is not the same as knowing man would become as evil as he did. God had higher hopes for His creation.

The flood story is problematic historically, for reasons I'm sure you're aware of. But the language of the Tanakh authors was never completely free of error either. This is obviously an author's attempt to tell a story. God didn't regret Himself (which is what you're actually implying) the days, the weeks, the decades after He created man and fulfilled His will- at least not enough to destroy them all indiscriminately. -- And yet somehow, all the infants, children, and fetuses, apart from Noah's family are candidates for God's blunder. Again your falling into a trap. You shouldn't be allowing yourself to think God makes mistakes. If God is incapable of implementing His will perfectly according to His will, He is not perfect, but capable of regret (a human emotion, due to senses of responsibility and guilt).

But the Lord came down to see the city and the tower which the sons of men had built. And the Lord said, "Indeed, the people are one and they all have one language..." Genesis 11:5,6

Gathering information again! And obviously, it was information He didn't completely possess before.

Seeing something unseen? Or unknown? God says "Behold, they are one people..." Who is He speaking to? Why is He giving the order to divide their language?

And the Lord said, "Because the outcry against Sodom and Gomorrah is great, and because their sin is very grievous, I will go down now and see whether they have done altogether according to the outcry against it that has come to Me; and if not, I will know." Genesis 18:20,21

It sounds like He didn't know for sure and was going on a fact-finding mission again!

Seeing something unseen? Or unknown? -- In this case, God is being described as hearing Sodom and Gomorrah, with all certainty. The author then goes on to say that God wants to verify what He is hearing with sight. Go back and read Psalm 139:1-12. According to this author, God resides in one place. According to the author of Psalm 139, God resides in all places. According to this author God must hear and see things (as humans do), to gain knowledge and make decisions. According to the author of Psalm 139, nothing is hidden from God, because every day to ever exist is already documented. -- You have to then ask yourself why that is.

But the Angel of the Lord called to him from heaven and said, "Abraham, Abraham!" And he said, "Here I am." And He said, "Do not lay your hand on the lad, or do anything to him; for now I know that you fear God, since you have not withheld your son, your only son, from Me." Genesis 22:11,12

Again, "now I know", as though He wasn't completely sure before.

"Now I know" actually doesn't negate past or future knowledge. It only speaks of the "now" in question. But we are dealing with a human author here, as well. There are a few assumptions you have to be making to accept this story:

1) God lies.
2) God builds His trust of His own creation, by asking that creation to sacrifice his son.
3) Isaac had been prophesied of before this, and so God was willing to contradict Himself, along with the lie.
4) Ignores Psalm 139 again.

Now the word of the Lord came to Samuel, saying, "I greatly regret that I have set up Saul as king, for he has turned back from following Me, and has not performed My commandments." 1Samuel 15:11

How can an intelligent God do something He knew He would wish He hadn't done?

That was the way the authors, and the ancient Israelites mostly understood things. For them, God was capable of making mistakes. If we read the Sodom and Gomorrah episode, we notice that Abraham thought the same thing. He believed that God was capable of indiscriminately destroying lives, and that God didn't know who was where. Tanach authors also facilitated the false dichotomy which says that there were only two sorts of people possible in Sodom and Gomorrah: righteous and unrighteous. Any sane person knows that people are diverse. If they'd looked at what happened to Saul, and King David, and Moses, and anyone else- you'd think they'd know not to attempt dividing people in such a dualistic manner.

"And they built the high places of Baal which are in the Valley of the Son of Hinnom, to cause their sons and their daughters to pass through the fire to Molech, which I did not command them, nor did it come into My mind that they should do this abomination, to cause Judah to sin." Jeremiah 32:35 (see also Jeremiah 7:31 and 19:5)

God said Himself that it never came into His mind!! " Yeshua/Jesus and Judaism versus Paul and Christianity

And this is perfectly acceptable. There was really little Jeremiah could do to articulate this. How can the Good Father command an evil thing? It is impossible (unless you believe Abraham was commanded to pass his only son through the fire). Well God commanded their existence, and their livelihood, and completely documented their days. How can Christ say that the son of Man must be delivered over to the hands of sinners, to be tortured and crucified? Or that, one of you (my own disciples) will betray me? -- According to what is written in God's word? Jeremiah was making a valid point concerning future events, in relation to past events. His point is very simple: we shouldn't be continuing to sacrifice our sons and daughters, especially to Molech, whom we have no real control over. But fast forward to the episode of Elisha using God's "name" to curse a considerable number of young men, and it is an acceptable sacrifice, because the control is maintained.

And it hath been, as I watched over them to pluck up, And to break down, and to throw down, And to destroy, and to afflict; So do I watch over them to build, and to plant, An affirmation of God.

So if God did not command them, who did? And why? -- Ask yourself these questions. Where did they receive their inheritance? Who created them? Who decided the length of their hair, the color of their eyes, the size of their brains, and the functions of their being? Did God command the light to shine through the darkness? Did it refuse? Did it do the opposite? Is God limited by His creation, in such a manner as to inquire of them? To repent at their request? To feel regret at their behest? To have commands circumvented? By what power is man elevated above God? Are you sure you want to fall into that illusion- that trap of autolatry and confusion?

 

[Pegg]

"And not only this, but when Rebecca also had conceived by one man, even by our father Isaac(for the children not yet being born, nor having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works but of Him who calls), it was said to her, "The older shall serve the younger.." As it is written, "Jacob I have loved, but Esau I have hated." What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? Certainly not! For He says to Moses, "I will have mercy on whomever I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whomever I will have compassion." So then, it is not of him who wills nor of him who runs, but of God who shows mercy. For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, 'Even for this same purpose I have raised you up, that I might show My power in you, and that My name might be declared in all the earth.' Therefore He has mercy on whom He wills, and whom He wills He hardens. You will say to me then, 'Why does He still find fault? For who has resisted His will?' But indeed, O man, who are you to reply against God? Will the thing formed say to him who formed it, 'Why have you made me like this?' Does not the potter have power over the clay, from the same lump to make one vessel for honor and another for dishonor? What if God, wanting to show His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, and that He might make known the riches of His glory on the vessels of mercy, which He had prepared beforehand for glory, even us whom He called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?" Romans 9:10-24

I don't even need to argue this point. Just read what Paul says.

Meanwhile, Apostle Paul sits in heaven from his position as a king and priest and awaits for the judgement day.

 

[Kolibri]

You didn't address the prophecy, which is the most important piece of the puzzle here. God states before they are both born, that the older will serve the younger. What was the reason God said this, before they had even been born?

God could read their temperaments even while still hidden from sight
Ps 139:15,16 - "My bones were not hidden from you When I was made in secret, When I was woven in the depths of the earth. Your eyes even saw me as an embryo; All its parts were written in your book Regarding the days when they were formed, Before any of them existed."
---------------------------------
Hate has varying degrees as used in scripture
The lightest degree is 'unloved' or 'loved less'

Ge 29:30,31- "Then Jacob had relations also with Rachel, and he loved Rachel more than Le'ah, and he served him for another seven years. When Jehovah saw that Le'ah was unloved, (Lit., "hated.") he enabled her to become pregnant, but Rachel was barren."

De 21:15,16 - "If a man has two wives and he loves one more than the other (Lit., "two wives, one loved and one hated.") and both have borne sons to him and the firstborn son belongs to the unloved one, on the day that he gives his inheritance to his sons, he will not be allowed to treat the son of the loved one as his firstborn at the expense of the son of the unloved one, the firstborn."

 

[Sleeppy]

God could read their temperaments even while still hidden from sight
Ps 139:15,16 - "My bones were not hidden from you When I was made in secret, When I was woven in the depths of the earth. Your eyes even saw me as an embryo; All its parts were written in your book Regarding the days when they were formed, Before any of them existed."
---------------------------------
Hate has varying degrees as used in scripture
The lightest degree is 'unloved' or 'loved less'

Ge 29:30,31- "Then Jacob had relations also with Rachel, and he loved Rachel more than Le'ah, and he served him for another seven years. When Jehovah saw that Le'ah was unloved, (Lit., "hated.") he enabled her to become pregnant, but Rachel was barren."

De 21:15,16 - "If a man has two wives and he loves one more than the other (Lit., "two wives, one loved and one hated.") and both have borne sons to him and the firstborn son belongs to the unloved one, on the day that he gives his inheritance to his sons, he will not be allowed to treat the son of the loved one as his firstborn at the expense of the son of the unloved one, the firstborn."

What is the literal translation of Psalm 139:15-16? -- Of course, we know hate should be specific.. It really should be even more transparent than what the authors put forth.

 

[Kolibri]

What is the literal translation of Psalm 139:15-16?

I do not now how to read Hebrew to give a word for word breakdown. I know depths could be "lowest parts." Barring getting a Hebrew linguist in this thread, (I am too new to RF to know if one is here already) this link might give you what you are looking for.

Psalms Chapter 139 - Parallel Hebrew Old Testament

 

[Simplelogic]

Meanwhile, Apostle Paul sits in heaven from his position as a king and priest and awaits for the judgement day.

Wow. This is quite a reply!

Paul claims that God hates and loves people before they are born. Paul also claims that He creates "vessels of wrath" whom He has "prepared for destruction". Your only rebuttal to these horrible concepts is that Paul has authority, and we should just believe what he says. Yet the things he says about YHVH have NO PLACE IN THE HEBREW SCRIPTURES.

Yet Yeshua himself confirms that there were TWELVE APOSTLES OF THE LAMB in Johns Revelation. Where does that leave Paul then?

 

[Simplelogic]

What is the literal translation of Psalm 139:15-16? -- Of course, we know hate should be specific.. It really should be even more transparent than what the authors put forth.

"Psalm 139:16

One of the most common passages you will hear a Calvinist quote is part of Psalm 139. When a Calvinist uses this passage as a proof text for the concept of an ultra-sovereign God, he will almost always use the NIV translation. When the NIV translation first came out years ago, it didn't take much reading for me to quickly come to the conclusion it had a very profound pro-Calvinism spin to it. In spite of the fact that there is no Hebrew, or even Greek word for the English word "sovereign", nor is the word "sovereign" used even once in the KJV or NKJV translations, the NIV translators saw fit to use it 303 times! In almost all of the cases, the Hebrew word translated "sovereign" was "adoni" which means "my Lord". "My Lord" is a title, but the word "sovereign" in the NIV is used as an adjective with the intent to portray a characteristic! This is way out of legitimate lines. Come to find out more recently that the executive secretary of the NIV translation was none other than Edwin H. Palmer... Calvinist extraordinaire, author of other pro-Calvinist books like, The Five Points of Calvinism ! Surprise surprise.

The NIV quote that one will hear from Psalm 139 is:

"All the days ordained for me were written in your book before one of them came to be." Psalm 139:16

There's the proof in all its hideous glory! How can anyone argue with this? David clearly said that every day of his life on earth was written out in a book before it ever started! Or was it? The context in which this passage is found is of David describing the wonderful design of his body when it was formed in his mother's womb. Let's look at the context of this statement in the NKJV version.

"For You have formed my inward parts; You have covered me in my mother's womb. I will praise You, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made; Marvelous are Your works, and that my soul knows very well. My frame was not hidden from You When I was made in secret, and skillfully wrought in the lowest parts of the earth. Your eyes saw my substance, being yet unformed." Psalm 139:13-16a

The very next sentence is the one quoted above concerning the days ordained for David. That same sentence in the KJV reads like this;

"And in thy book all my members were written, which in continuance were fashioned, when as yet there was none of them." vs. 16b

The NIV translation wants us to believe David was talking about the days of his life being written out in advance. In the KJV version, David is clearly speaking of his body parts being written in a book before they were formed. Which is it? They both can't be right. The context in which this sentence is found is of the wonder and beauty of God's design and engineering when David's body was being formed in his mother's womb. Therefore the context demands that we understand David was referring to his body parts and not his future. Nowhere in this entire Psalm is there any mention of the future.

The sad thing about the NIV version is, not only is it misleading us toward a pro-Calvinist picture, but it is also blinding us to the incredible beauty of the truth that David speaks of. So how can all David's body parts be written out in a book before any of them came into existence? In the DNA of his genetic code! At the moment of conception, when therecombination process of all genetic information is completed, every detail of a person's body is written out and established long before any of the body parts actually begin to form. This is what David was speaking about. Read it again if necessary. Under the influence of the Holy Spirit, David spoke of this incredibly fascinating feat of God's engineering over four thousand years ago! Science hasn't even known about it for 100 years! " The Attributes of Deity part 2

 

[Simplelogic]

Seeing something doesn't negate the possibility that what is being seen had already been seen, or known. -- God asks rhetorical questions all the time. And He's fully aware of the people who will attempt to answer them, and what they will attempt with.



The flood story is problematic historically, for reasons I'm sure you're aware of. But the language of the Tanakh authors was never completely free of error either. This is obviously an author's attempt to tell a story. God didn't regret Himself (which is what you're actually implying) the days, the weeks, the decades after He created man and fulfilled His will- at least not enough to destroy them all indiscriminately. -- And yet somehow, all the infants, children, and fetuses, apart from Noah's family are candidates for God's blunder. Again your falling into a trap. You shouldn't be allowing yourself to think God makes mistakes. If God is incapable of implementing His will perfectly according to His will, He is not perfect, but capable of regret (a human emotion, due to senses of responsibility and guilt).




Seeing something unseen? Or unknown? God says "Behold, they are one people..." Who is He speaking to? Why is He giving the order to divide their language?



Seeing something unseen? Or unknown? -- In this case, God is being described as hearing Sodom and Gomorrah, with all certainty. The author then goes on to say that God wants to verify what He is hearing with sight. Go back and read Psalm 139:1-12. According to this author, God resides in one place. According to the author of Psalm 139, God resides in all places. According to this author God must hear and see things (as humans do), to gain knowledge and make decisions. According to the author of Psalm 139, nothing is hidden from God, because every day to ever exist is already documented. -- You have to then ask yourself why that is.



"Now I know" actually doesn't negate past or future knowledge. It only speaks of the "now" in question. But we are dealing with a human author here, as well. There are a few assumptions you have to be making to accept this story:

1) God lies.
2) God builds His trust of His own creation, by asking that creation to sacrifice his son.
3) Isaac had been prophesied of before this, and so God was willing to contradict Himself, along with the lie.
4) Ignores Psalm 139 again.


That was the way the authors, and the ancient Israelites mostly understood things. For them, God was capable of making mistakes. If we read the Sodom and Gomorrah episode, we notice that Abraham thought the same thing. He believed that God was capable of indiscriminately destroying lives, and that God didn't know who was where. Tanach authors also facilitated the false dichotomy which says that there were only two sorts of people possible in Sodom and Gomorrah: righteous and unrighteous. Any sane person knows that people are diverse. If they'd looked at what happened to Saul, and King David, and Moses, and anyone else- you'd think they'd know not to attempt dividing people in such a dualistic manner.



And this is perfectly acceptable. There was really little Jeremiah could do to articulate this. How can the Good Father command an evil thing? It is impossible (unless you believe Abraham was commanded to pass his only son through the fire). Well God commanded their existence, and their livelihood, and completely documented their days. How can Christ say that the son of Man must be delivered over to the hands of sinners, to be tortured and crucified? Or that, one of you (my own disciples) will betray me? -- According to what is written in God's word? Jeremiah was making a valid point concerning future events, in relation to past events. His point is very simple: we shouldn't be continuing to sacrifice our sons and daughters, especially to Molech, whom we have no real control over. But fast forward to the episode of Elisha using God's "name" to curse a considerable number of young men, and it is an acceptable sacrifice, because the control is maintained.



So if God did not command them, who did? And why? -- Ask yourself these questions. Where did they receive their inheritance? Who created them? Who decided the length of their hair, the color of their eyes, the size of their brains, and the functions of their being? Did God command the light to shine through the darkness? Did it refuse? Did it do the opposite? Is God limited by His creation, in such a manner as to inquire of them? To repent at their request? To feel regret at their behest? To have commands circumvented? By what power is man elevated above God? Are you sure you want to fall into that illusion- that trap of autolatry and confusion?

This is what people usually do. They try to minimize the word of YHVH to suggest that the prophet was doing "story telling" when the text says that YHVH Himself was speaking through these men.

 

[Simplelogic]

3) Paul was quoting Malachi, as you are aware. Paul explicitly draws the conclusion that they were blessed and cursed according to God's determination. But, the implicit truth is there. If God made the prophecy before they were born, that the older would serve the younger, when all along the Law and the tradition was the reverse- then according to everything we should know about genetics, and justice, God's determination or prophecy was not a reasonable reaction to His own creation. It was an action, a premeditation, which preceded creation altogether. Refer back to verse 16 of Psalm 139.

Paul is quoting Malachi in the same breath as Genesis. He is obviously trying to paint the picture that YHVH hated Esau before birth. This is why Paul anticipates an objection! Esau was not cursed in Genesis. He was actually given a significant blessing itself. It was inferior to Jacobs though.

When God is speaking in Malachi He is speaking of Esau the NATION which had become evil and attacked YHVH's people. It had nothing to do with predestination! They had simply become evil!

Paul's quotes are deceptive and misleading. He rips scriptures out of context and pastes them together to make his blasphemous points. It is a clever slight of hand which has led many people down this terrible road of believing YHVH is controlling humanity. It also means that all the evil that goes on in this world is merely part of God's divine plan which He has predetermined before the foundations of the world!! Ughhh! Not wonder so many people reject the god of christianity.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

Many Christians have a problem with the concept of Predestination and with the concept of pre selection for Salvation.
I am perfectly happy to believe in neither as certain.
They have been bitterly disputed since the earliest days.
They fall into the same bracket as the Trinity
and the perpetual virginity of Mary.

They are not necessarily true, and they are unsatisfactorily explained.

 

[Simplelogic]

Many Christians have a problem with the concept of Predestination and with the concept of pre selection for Salvation.
I am perfectly happy to believe in neither as certain.
They have been bitterly disputed since the earliest days.
They fall into the same bracket as the Trinity
and the perpetual virginity of Mary.

They are not necessarily true, and they are unsatisfactorily explained.

Very true. However I am convinced that predestination has its origins with Paul ALONE. People then read Paul's disgusting concept back into different sound byte scriptures ripped out of context.

The ultra sovereign picture of a God who controls everything and micromanages free will was completely made up. Neither the Hebrew Scriptures nor the words of Yeshua can be used to make this argument. Thats the point I am trying to make.

 

[Kolibri]

Paul himself did not consider himself individually predestined. In Php 3:8-15, Paul talks about "my aim" and says "I am pressing on to see if I may also lay hold on that for which Christ Jesus selected me. Brothers, I do not yet consider myself as having taken hold of it;...I am pressing on toward the goal for the prize of the upward call of God by means of Christ Jesus." And he showed concern that if he was not firm with himself, he might be "disapproved (or "disqualified.") somehow." (1 Co 9:27) He did talk about "there being reserved...the crown of righteousness" for him and others, but only when his death was "imminent." (2 Ti:6-8)

So no, Paul did not support the idea that people as individuals are predestined, as to being foreordained to eternal salvation or damnation. But he did support that God foreknew and foreordained that classes of people would exist.