/christian/ - Christian Discussion and Fellowship

their rejection is temporary, a trial, like what happened to Jonah.

all will return to God and everything will be well. No exceptions.

>>571441

But Jesus says Hell is eternal, anon. Matt 25:46

Figure out which definition of "men" and you will find your answer

First defintion: all humans, see dictionary

Second defintion: all adult males, see dictionary

Third defintion: all males, see dictionary

Fourth definition: Genesis 19:1,2,5,8 KJV.

>>571441

>t. origen

>>571462

>1 And there came two angels to Sodom at even; and Lot sat in the gate of Sodom: and Lot seeing them rose up to meet them; and he bowed himself with his face toward the ground;

>2 And he said, Behold now, my lords, turn in, I pray you, into your servant's house, and tarry all night, and wash your feet, and ye shall rise up early, and go on your ways. And they said, Nay; but we will abide in the street all night.

>5 And they called unto Lot, and said unto him, Where are the men which came in to thee this night? bring them out unto us, that we may know them.

>8 Behold now, I have two daughters which have not known man; let me, I pray you, bring them out unto you, and do ye to them as is good in your eyes: only unto these men do nothing; for therefore came they under the shadow of my roof.

Well that wasn't helpful at all.

>>571468

>he calls "angels" in verse 1 "men" in verse 8

>the sodomites call the angels "men" in verse 2

There are other examples if you want them. See 2 samuel 19:22,27 and 1 samuel 17:12 . See how David, a man, is called an angel.

>>571470

I am not seeing how this is relevant. John 3:17 says Jesus was sent to save the world. Not "only heterosexuals." Moreover, neither Pharaoh nor Esau are described as homosexuals.

>>571471

>John 3:17 says Jesus was sent to save the world

No, it does not. Read John 3:17 KJV

>For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved

>but that the world through him might be saved

>might be

Huge difference.

>>571473

So not all who believe in Jesus will be saved?

>>571474

No, I didn't say that. You do realise that because of ecclasasties 3:18-21 and Romans 10:16-17 not everyone has the 1 corinthians 15:44. Which means Christians aren't born of Galatians 4:30-31 but of Galatains 3:21-29. For romans 8:8 holds true. Which means not all can have beleif or faith.

>>571475

You are not helpful.

Tell me your conclusion, the explain your argumentation. For example, "I think baptism should be done to adult believers only and not babies because Paul made the man in Acts 8:37 profess his faith in Jesus before baptizing him, but babies cannot believe because they are too young and ignorant. "

Do not simply cite scripture assuming I understand the verses in the same way you do. Do not assume I will read the verses with the same understanding you have reached.

For the purpose of answering my question, assume I am like a child approaching God, that I know no scripture at all.

>>571473

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Final_clause

>>571478

Do you understand english? Let me put it very plainly for you. Because of ecclesasties 3:18-21 humans are animals/beasts. Because of romans 8:8 flesh and blood humans or animals can not inherit the kingdom of God. 1 corinthians 15:44 states that there is a spiritual body and a physical body. Therefore if you are a human you must also have a spirit body to inherit the kingdom of God.

Romans 10:16-17 states quite literally that "who hath believed our report?" So "then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God". Who can receive the things of God? Those not in the flesh romans 8:9 but those in the Spirit of Christ. "Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his. romans 8:9. So if you are of God and have a spirit because of romans 8:16 then galatians 3:21-29 applies to you. For there is neither jew nor greek for all are one in Christ. And if in Christ then heirs according to the promise in galatians 3:21-29. But if you are of the bondmaid of galatains 3:30-31 you are not of the promise just like romans 8:8 states that flesh and blood can not inherit the kingdom of God.

>>571480

Friend, you would make a terrible lawyer.

If I understand you correctly, you are saying some men are born of the promise of Christ and some are not. In other words, only some men are capable of achieving salvation.

That does not account for the scripture also saying that all men can be saved. You have not presented any way to reconcile Romans 9 with 1 Timothy 2.

>>571486

1 Timothy 2 is all kinds of men, not all individual men

>First of all, then, I urge that entreaties and prayers, petitions and thanksgivings, be made on behalf of all men, for kings and all who are in authority

>>571486

>That does not account for the scripture also saying that all men can be saved.

Did you define men correctly? See >>571470 and >>571462 again.

>You have not presented any way to reconcile Romans 9 with 1 Timothy 2.

Let's go verse by verse then

>I SAY the truth in Christ, I lie not, my conscience also bearing me witness in the Holy Ghost,

>That I have great heaviness and continual sorrow in my heart.

>For I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh:

>Who are Israelites; to whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises;

>Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen.

>Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel:

>Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called.

>That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.

This is paul calling out the physical jews who were no longer spiritual jews after the declaration that all are one in Christ and that the Holy Ghost had come upon the uttermost parts of the earth in acts 1:8

>For this is the word of promise, At this time will I come, and Sara shall have a son.

>And not only this; but when Rebecca also had conceived by one, even by our father Isaac;

>(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;)

>It was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger.

>As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.

>What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid.

>For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.

This is Paul describing to the reader that God will giveth spirits as it pleaseth him also see 1 corinthians 15:38

>So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy.

>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.

>Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth.

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

>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?

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

>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:

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

>Even us, whom he hath called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?

The verse above points out this is talking about those called vs not called which is those well see the next verses.

>As he saith also in Osee, I will call them my people, which were not my people; and her beloved, which was not beloved.

>And it shall come to pass, that in the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not my people; there shall they be called the children of the living God.

>Esaias also crieth concerning Israel, Though the number of the children of Israel be as the sand of the sea, a remnant shall be saved:

>For he will finish the work, and cut it short in righteousness: because a short work will the Lord make upon the earth.

>And as Esaias said before, Except the Lord of Sabaoth had left us a seed, we had been as Sodoma, and been made like unto Gomorrha.

>What shall we say then? That the Gentiles, which followed not after righteousness, have attained to righteousness, even the righteousness which is of faith.

>But Israel, which followed after the law of righteousness, hath not attained to the law of righteousness.

This is in reference to the phsyical jews wanting to be under death/sin

>Wherefore? Because they sought it not by faith, but as it were by the works of the law. For they stumbled at that stumblingstone;

>As it is written, Behold, I lay in Sion a stumblingstone and rock of offence: and whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.

This is in reference to the correct way to go after such, of faith.

Next post will be 1 timothy 2.

>I EXHORT therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men;

Men could either be all of mankind or all christians. Let's keep reading and see which.

>For kings, and for all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty.

Who can be godly? See john 10:35.

>For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour;

>Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.

This is clearly in reference to Christians because of romans 8:8

>For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;

>Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.

>Whereunto I am ordained a preacher, and an apostle, (I speak the truth in Christ, and lie not;) a teacher of the Gentiles in faith and verity.

>I will therefore that men pray every where, lifting up holy hands, without wrath and doubting.

>In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array;

>But (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works.

>Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.

>But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.

>For Adam was first formed, then Eve.

>And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.

>Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.

The rest just talks about orders for christians. How exactly could this conflict with romans 9?

>>571450

hell is eternal, but you're being there doesn't have to be.

>>571435

God desires all men to be saved, however God is just and for that reason whatever one sows the same he shall also reap. God in His desire to save shows us mercy, however the rejection of that mercy requires God to show His justice. It is for that reason that all sin is punished in this life or the next, since to sin is fundamentally to reject God, which warrants the punishment. Some things warrant bigger punishments, such as with Pharaoh. As far as Jacob and Esau go, God hated Esau not arbitrarily, but because of what He knew Esau would do, which was to sell his birthright for food. Hardening and mercy is shown to be a reciprocal action in Exodus, God has mercy on whom He will, which is all, but Hardens those who reject this mercy, that is, He hardens those who harden themselves just as with Pharaoh. It is a mistake to assume this mercy and hardening is arbitrary. The events in exodus do not support this. For the vessels of wrath, it does not say He had prepared them for destruction like He had prepared unto glory. As we know, God is not arbitrary, and in His desire to see all men saved there are those that reject this offering, and so God not wishing the death of the wicked will endure them, even though He knows they won't repent. Now, that verse opens "willing to shew His wrath", and so it may be mistakenly seen as God creates them to show His wrath. However this is in contradiction to scripture which says "For God has consigned all men to disobedience, that he may have mercy upon all.". Now, it is shown that God has let men be disobedient for the purpose of showing mercy. Hence the alternative conclusion, that God does not create them for disobedience to show His wrath but merely allows them to be disobedient whereby He will show His wrath is more in line with the testimony of scripture.

You know repentance is a grace given by God when you seek him, so you can back to him when YOU want to come back to him. When someone doesn't want to look for God, doesn't want to come to Him, then God won't force the will of anyone. Forced love isn't love. The same happens with demons you know. Can Satan be forgiven? Of course, God mercy is infinite. But he won't repent.

The Pharaoh didn't want to repent. Didn't want to look for God, he choose to worship his own power and pride, and God gave him what he wanted, just that. He made his choice, right before him he had a prophet performing miracles and still he choose to stand against God. Furthermore, God having perfect foreknowledge, knew that the Pharaoh would reject everything throw at him and thus making him even more evil. What more proof do you want that having Moses right before you?

This is reprobation, and it's terrible, yes. The possibility that this can happen is terrible, and reminds us that we must stand ever vigilant.

Moreover, "God showing His wrath" is how externally He looks to us, humans. God can't be mad, he isn't human.

>2 For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.

>And not only she:

Sara brought forth Isaac, who was the only child of Abraham, to whom the promises descended, though he was the father of Ismael, by Agar, and of all the Ismaelites. And lest the Jews should say that the Ismaelites, though descending from Abraham, according to the flesh, were not to be reputed as his children for another reason, because they came of Agar, who was only the handmaid of Sara; he brings them another example to which they could make no such reply; to wit, that

>but when Rebecca also had conceived at once, by Isaac, our father.

where, though Esau was the first-born, these promises were not reputed as made to him, and his descendants, the Idumeans, who were equally the descendants of Isaac, yet not the favourite people, nor the children of God, as the Jews saw very well.

<For when the children were not yet born,

By this example of these twins, and the preference of the younger to the elder, the drift of the apostle is, to shew that God, in his election, mercy, and grace, is not tied to any particular nation, as the Jews imagined, nor to any prerogative of birth, or any foregoing merits. For as, antecedently, to his grace, he sees no merit in any, but finds all involved in sin, in the common mass of condemnation; and all children of wrath; there is no one whom he might not justly leave in that mass; so that whomsoever he delivers from it, he delivers in his mercy: and whomsoever he leaves in it, he leaves in his justice. As when, of two equally criminal, the king is pleased out of pure mercy to pardon one, whilst he suffers justice to take place in the execution of the other.

>nor had done any good or evil,

God was pleased to prefer, and promise his blessings to the younger of them, Jacob, declaring

>that the purpose of God

his will, and his decree, (see the foregoing chap. ver. 28.)

>according to election

might be, not according to any works they had done, or that he foresaw they would do, but merely according to his mercy. And though the preference which God gave to Jacob was literally true, as to temporal benefits; yet St. Augustine observes in divers places, that Jacob was a figure of the elect or predestinate, and Esau of the reprobate; and that as Jacob and his posterity was more favoured, purely by the mercy of God, without any merits on their side; so are God's elect, whom he has called, and to whom, according to his eternal purpose, he decreed to give eternal glory, and special graces to bring them thither.

>might stand. Not of works, but of him that calleth, it was said to her: That the elder shall serve the younger,

that is, that the seed of the elder should be subject to that of the younger, as it happened afterwards to the Idumeans. And the prophet, Malachias, said of them

>as it is written: Jacob I have loved, but Esau I have hated.

and turned his mountains into a desert, &c.

>What shall we say then? Is there injustice with God?

when he bestows special favours and benefits on some, and not on others? He answers,

>God forbid.

And he justifies almighty God's conduct, ver. 22. In the mean time, it is certain that there is no injustice in not giving what another has no right to: and besides all men having sinned, deserved punishment. If then, he shews mercy to some, it is an effect of his goodness and liberality only which they do not deserve. If he leaves others in their sins, they are only punished according to their deserts. His mercy shines upon his elect; and his divine justice is displayed against the wicked and the reprobate, but only according to what they have deserved.

> For he saith to Moses: I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy: and I will shew mercy to whom I will shew mercy. So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy.

By these words he again teaches that God's call and predestination of those whom he has decreed to save, is not upon account of any works or merits in men, but only to be attributed to the mercy and goodness of God. See St. Thomas Aquinas on this chap. lect. iii. See St. Augustine, Encher. chap. xcviii. Epis. 194. in the new Ed. Ep. 105. ad Sixtum de lib. Arbit. chap. xxv. &c.

>>571550

>For the Scripture saith to Pharao:

St. Paul had shewn that there was no injustice in God by his giving special graces to the elect; now he shews that God cannot be accounted unjust for leaving the reprobate in their sins, or for punishing them as they deserve; for this purpose he brings the example of Pharao, who remained hardened against all the admonitions and chastisements of him and his kingdom

>To this purpose have I raised thee up, that I may shew my power in thee: and that my name may be declared throughout all the earth.

placed thee king over Egypt; I have done so many miracles before thee, I have spared thee when thou deservedst to be punished with death, and at last shall punish thee with thy army in the Red Sea, that my name may be known over all the earth.

>Therefore he hath mercy on whom he will, and whom he will he hardeneth.

That is, permits to be hardened by their own malice, as it is divers times said in Exodus, that Pharao hardened his heart. God, says St. Augustine, is said to harden men's hearts, not by causing their malice, but by not giving them the free gift of his grace, by which they become hardened by their own perverse will.

Not by being the cause, or author of his sin, but by withholding his grace, and so leaving him in his sin, in punishment of his past demerits.

>Thou wilt say, therefore, to me: Why doth he then find fault? For who resisteth his will?

The apostle makes objection, that if God call some, and harden, or even permit others to be hardened, and no one resisteth, or can hinder his absolute will, why should God complain that men are not converted? St. Paul first puts such rash and profane men in mind, that is unreasonable and impertinent for creatures to murmur and dispute against God their Creator, when they do not comprehend the ways of his providence.

>O man, who art thou that repliest against God?

This might stop the mouths, and quiet the minds of every man, when he cannot comprehend the mysteries of predestination, of God's foreknowledge, his decrees and graces, or the manner of reconciling them with human liberty. He may cry out with St. Paul again, (chap. xi. 33.) O the riches of the wisdom, and of the knowledge of God! how incomprehensible are his judgments, and how unsearchable his ways!

>Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it: Why hast thou made me thus? Or hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump, to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?

This might stop the mouths, and quiet the minds of every man, when he cannot comprehend the mysteries of predestination, of God's foreknowledge, his decrees and graces, or the manner of reconciling them with human liberty. He may cry out with St. Paul again, (chap. xi. 33.) O the riches of the wisdom, and of the knowledge of God! how incomprehensible are his judgments, and how unsearchable his ways!

The potter. This similitude is used, only to shew that we are not to dispute with our Maker: nor to reason with him why he does not give as much grace to one as to another: for since the whole lump of our clay is vitiated by sin, it is owing to his goodness and mercy that he makes out of it so many vessels of honour; and it is no more than just that others, in punishment of their unrepented sins, should be given up to be vessels of dishonour.

>And if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much patience vessels of wrath, fitted for destruction, that he might shew the riches of his glory upon the vessels of mercy, which he hath prepared unto glory.

He now gives the reason why God might, without any injustice, have mercy on some, and not on others; grant particular graces and favours to his elect, and not equally to all; because all mankind was become liable to damnation by original sin: the clay that all are made of, is a sinful clay; and as St. Augustine says, was become a lump and mass of damnation. Every one had sinned in Adam. Now, if out of this sinful lump and multitude God, to shew the richness of his glory, and superabundant mercy, hath chosen some as vessels of election, whom he hath decreed to save, and by special graces and favours to make partakers of his heavenly kingdom; and to shew his justice and hatred of sin, hath left others as vessels of his wrath and justice, to be lost in their sins, which for a time he bears patiently with, when they deserved present punishment, who can say that he hath done unjustly?

>>571467

That's St Origen to you Heresiarch

>>571467

>For it is written: As I live, saith the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God.

Every thing shall return to God. Of course, condemned and saved people will return different, but all the same will return, nothing will be outside God and everything is for His glory.

>>571553

>Orgien

>Saint

Him being timetraveler who wrote LXX make more sense than this

>>571441

>>571559

>And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name.

Revelation 14:11 KJV

I don't think so fellas…

>>571493

>Did you define men correctly?

You keep citing that as though its relevant. I do not see any reason to connect that to the passages at issue here.

Your responses seem incoherent to me.

>>571495

>How exactly could this conflict with romans 9?

Either God wants all men to be saved and opened salvation to all men like scripture says in 1 Timothy 2, John 3, and Titus 2 or God does not want all men to be saved, because like a potter molding clay, He fashions men to reject him, destining them for eternal damnation.

>Some things warrant bigger punishments, such as with Pharaoh

But Pharaoh didn't get a choice, not really anyway. Paul tells us Pharaoh was lifted to up just to be struck down. He never had the opportunity to be saved, in contrast to what Jesus and the other apostles said.

>God has mercy on whom He will, which is all, but Hardens those who reject this mercy, that is, He hardens those who harden themselves just as with Pharaoh.

So God pushes people further away from Him who have already begun rejecting him? God actively makes it harder for nonbelievers to accept Him?

>For the vessels of wrath, it does not say He had prepared them for destruction like He had prepared unto glory.

Back up one verse.

>"hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump, to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?"

>hath not the potter power … to make one vessel … unto dishonour?

It seems to me Paul is considering that God formed some men with the intent to destroy them.

>>571536

>You know repentance is a grace given by God when you seek him, so you can back to him when YOU want to come back to him.

It is not of him that 'willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy.

God shows mercy on men not based on their will or their works toward achieving mercy.

>The Pharaoh didn't want to repent. Didn't want to look for God, he choose to worship his own power and pride, and God gave him what he wanted, just that.

But Romans 9 says: "the Scripture saith to Pharao: To this purpose have I raised thee up, that I may shew my power in thee: and that my name may be declared throughout all the earth. "

Therefore it seems to me Pharaoh wasn't given a choice. Pharaoh was raised up for the purpose of showing God's wrath. It's not that Pharaoh didn't want to repent, God made it so that he could not repent.

>God can't be mad, he isn't human

Deuteronomy 6:15; Deuteronomy 4:24; Deuteronomy 11:17; Psalm 7:11; 1 Kings 11:9,10; 2 Kings 17:18; Mark 3:4,5;

The bible clearly describes God as angry.

>>571550

>Jacob was a figure of the elect or predestinate, and Esau of the reprobate; and that as Jacob and his posterity was more favoured, purely by the mercy of God, without any merits on their side; so are God's elect, whom he has called, and to whom, according to his eternal purpose, he decreed to give eternal glory, and special graces to bring them thither.

So God doesn't want all men to be saved. He reserves it for His elect, and casts those unelected into the fire. This is precisely my hangup.

>God's call and predestination of those whom he has decreed to save, is not upon account of any works or merits in men, but only to be attributed to the mercy and goodness of God.

So my understanding is correct. Some men are predestined to Heaven and others are predestined to Hell before birth. How then can Jesus say that all men might be saved through Him? You can't have it both ways. Either no one is predestined or everyone is predestined.

>Not by being the cause, or author of his sin, but by withholding his grace, and so leaving him in his sin, in punishment of his past demerits.

Ok, so God doesn't actually harden the hearts of men, but allows men to harden themselves? But that goes against "on whom he will he hardeneth' " the verb there is not passive, but active. God wills hearts to harden.

I don't know guys. I can't see any way to reconcile this. I assume all your responses were made in good faith, and I assume you are all genuine in your understanding of these passages, such that they are not in contradiction. But I cannot yet see how it is possible to bring salvation to all men, yet predestine some men to Hellfire.

Perhaps, dare I say it, God has hardened my own heart beyond understanding? How would one even know?

>>571635

>But Pharaoh didn't get a choice, not really anyway. Paul tells us Pharaoh was lifted to up just to be struck down. He never had the opportunity to be saved, in contrast to what Jesus and the other apostles said.

Consider, if the Pharaoh had relented and let the Israelites go and sacrifice, wouldn't God also have been glorified? It did not need to be by disobedience, but because Pharaoh was disobedient, we see it play out in such a way.

>So God pushes people further away from Him who have already begun rejecting him? God actively makes it harder for nonbelievers to accept Him?

In measure to what they have done, they are so hardened. This hardening is not for evil, but that seeing themselves in a worse state they might take advantage of the grace constantly offered. It could be compared to a patient who refuses medicine. Once they start vomiting blood they will quickly go to the hospital. God may bring a person misfortune so that they can recognize the need they have for Him and come to Him.

>It seems to me Paul is considering that God formed some men with the intent to destroy them.

I will quote St. Chrystostom since I cannot express it properly.

<And yet not even is it on the potter that the honor and the dishonor of the things made of the lump depends, but upon the use made by those that handle them, so here also it depends on the free choice. Still, as I said before, one must take this illustration to have one bearing only, which is that one should not contravene God, but yield to His incomprehensible Wisdom. For the examples ought to be greater than the subject, and than the things on account of which they are brought forward, so as to draw on the hearer better

< Pharaoh was a vessel of wrath, that is, a man who by his own hard-heartedness had kindled the wrath of God. For after enjoying much long-suffering, he became no better, but remained unimproved. Wherefore he calls him not only 「a vessel of wrath,」 but also one 「fitted for destruction.」 That is, fully fitted indeed, but by his own proper self. For neither had God left out anything of the things likely to recover him, nor did he leave out anything of those that would ruin him, and put him beyond any forgiveness. Yet still, though God knew this, 「He endured him with much long-suffering,」 being willing to bring him to repentance. For had He not willed this, then He would not have been thus long-suffering. But as he would not use the long-suffering in order to repentance, but fully fitted himself for wrath, He used him for the correction of others, through the punishment inflicted upon him making them better, and in this way setting forth His power.

http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/210216.htm

>>571635

>But Pharaoh didn't get a choice, not really anyway. Paul tells us Pharaoh was lifted to up just to be struck down. He never had the opportunity to be saved, in contrast to what Jesus and the other apostles said.

The pharoh didn't fall under 1 corinthinas 15:44. He was only flesh so when he died he was dead like any animal/beast would be in accordance with ecclesasties 3:18-21. He had no spirit body, but he had a soul because of how revelation 16:3 is worded.

>So God pushes people further away from Him who have already begun rejecting him? God actively makes it harder for nonbelievers to accept Him?

God uses non-christians like the pharaoh to help or edify or test christians sometimes, yes.

>It seems to me Paul is considering that God formed some men with the intent to destroy them.

>men

Define men, which definition are you talking about? If you mean christiansfallen or otherwise/angels then no. If you mean fleshly dust beasts that are animals then yes.

>>571596

Ask yourself, what allows someone to survive or exist forever? To everlasting torment revelation 20:10 or to everlasting life? What if they lack that 1 corinthians 15:44 that lets the exist/survive forever? Do they just ecclesasties 3:18-21? Or do they revelation 20:6,10,13-15?

>>571524

>men

Define men.

God forces people to suffer so that they may be made pure. This includes even Pharoah.

This is why the idea of “purifying fire after death” is so important in Catholicism. Many are not pure when they die, so they must be cleaned in another place. Every suffering you go through in this life and afterlife takes some weight off your soul before you enter heaven.

The pharoah was an unrighteous man and he was made to suffer. The hardening of his heart was either 1) part of his entrance to Hell or 2) part of his purification before Heaven.

That’s why I don’t understand why predestinarians have a problem with Catholicism. Catholics are predestinarians as well: you have free will on earth, but before heaven you are FORCED to become clean. And it fucking sucks. But it’s part of God’s love for you.

>>571684

Adding on to this, God’s wrath is actually part of His Mercy. He loves you, so he makes you clean, even if you do not know what He is doing. He is like a stern father who, after disciplining an unruly child, welcomes the child lovingly back into the family.

>>571684

Christians/angels/gods/spirits that are fallen/unrepentent or otherwisetheir all synonyms looks it up the verses are in the thread have free will to obey or to disobey God i.e romans 13 amongst many many others. Non-christians who are animals that have souls revelation 16:3 in accordance with ecclesasties 3:18-21 just go into the dust as said in ecclesasties 3:20.

>>571678

>Define men.

SJW pls go

>>571714

Not a SJW, do you even read 1 corinthians 14:34-35? Take out a dictionary or read Genesis 19:1,2,5,8 , 2 samuel 19:22,27 and 1 samuel 17:12 KJV. Then define men.

>>571721

What does it feel like to know the Bible so well that you replace words with verses?

>>571725

>caring about feelings inspite of romans 8:8

Literally could care less how it feels if it helps edify christians better i.e 1 corinthians 14:26. Why don't you discern what God says in His word better then me in line with hebrews 4:12? His word is above His own name after all pslams 138:2. Do I need to quote all the verses that give much glory and praise to God's own name? His word is above such.

Now I am not going to be dogmatic about memorizing verses word for word or some such self-glorifying profanity. What matters is gloryfieing God and edifying christians and for me memorizing verse locations and words is better because I don't have a bookmark to consistently remember verse locations across multiple mediums like computer/phone/tablet/paper. Be ready in season and out 2 timothy 4:1-5

>>571678

>Ask yourself, what allows someone to survive or exist forever? To everlasting torment revelation 20:10 or to everlasting life? What if they lack that 1 corinthians 15:44 that lets the exist/survive forever? Do they just ecclesasties 3:18-21? Or do they revelation 20:6,10,13-15?

Can it not be both? Does it not make sense, however horrifying the consequences may be, that those of Man that denied their Godlike essence and instead used their appointed time to live as beasts, descend into dust in the earthly realm and into Hell and then later the Lake of Fire/Gehenna in the spiritual hereafter? This is coming from a Christian who is struggling with ridding himself of sin, but I don't wish myself or any other to be misled in their interpretation of this. I often feel the Annihiliationist point of view is a deceptive and disguised self-pity for what Man deserves, rather than facing the harsh truth of Death, we instead try to console ourselves by saying to ourselves "Those who die without Christ simply cease to exist, there is no torment or punishment." This is comforting twofold: 1. If the man who conceives of this himself goes to Perdition, he no longer exists or feels anything, rather than the fearful prospect of having selected Hell and the Lake of Fire rather than living every moment of his life trying to avoid it. 2. Those he loves who do not believe will not be suffering. Does this sound familiar to you? Because they have both tempted me at one point or another.

tl;dr Vessels of wrath remain vessels.

>>572055

What are you talking about?

>can it not be both?

No it can't, you can not be tormented forever while also having eternal life to serve God. If you are being tormented you are being punished for not being able to serve God in the first place.

>that those of Man that denied their Godlike essence

Care to explain how you came to the conclusion that beasts of the earth are in any shape way or form likened to God Himself? There is a difference between Godlyness and godlyness ffs.

>Those he loves who do not believe will not be suffering. Does this sound familiar to you? Because they have both tempted me at one point or another.

First I love God, His Son Jesus Christ, and my brother and mother are matthew 12:48-50. Secondly no, I am not talking about Christians, who will exist forever, avoiding the lake of fire. I am talking about animals like sheeps, biblical dogs, wolves, and etc just simply ceasing to exist. For they themselves are beasts as saith the Lord in ecclesasties 3:18-21.

>Those who die without Christ simply cease to exist, there is no torment or punishment."

I didn't say this. I quoted that those without the 1 corinthians 15:44 do that as they weren't born or chosen by God to have the 1 corinthians 15:44. But if they have the 1 corinthians 15:44 and yet still do not repent/obey God/do His will/edify the brethern, then they surely will go to hell and then the lake of fire.

>>572154

>>572154

>No it can't, you can not be tormented forever while also having eternal life to serve God. If you are being tormented you are being punished for not being able to serve God in the first place.

>But if they have the 1 corinthians 15:44 and yet still do not repent/obey God/do His will/edify the brethern, then they surely will go to hell and then the lake of fire.

<So… You can be tormented forever then? Hell and the Lake of Fire are eternal punishments.

>Care to explain how you came to the conclusion that beasts of the earth are in any shape way or form likened to God Himself?

<Are you being deliberately obtuse? You quote Ecclesiastes 3:18-21 but I'm not sure you understand what it means, either way, one of us has to be wrong.

I said in mine heart concerning the estate of the sons of men, that God might manifest them, and that they might see that they themselves are beasts.

For that which befalleth the sons of men befalleth beasts; even one thing befalleth them: as the one dieth, so dieth the other; yea, they have all one breath; so that a man hath no preeminence above a beast: for all is vanity.

All go unto one place; all are of the dust, and all turn to dust again.

<This passage is clearly showing that in Man's corrupted form, God tests us to show us how ALL men are as beasts shown by the way they treat each other. If we instead attained on to a more perfect spirit with every interaction and tribulation that comes our way, putting faith in God and the next world rather than acting out in this one due to our present, temporal circumstances, we would commit no sin. But instead we are shown to be brute beasts. Is there any other way to read this?

All go unto one place; all are of the dust, and all turn to dust again.

<Just to reiterate for your edification, ALL are going to the dust. This is not even yet considering what happens to the soul after death.

> There is a difference between Godlyness and godlyness

<Care to differentiate for me then?

>First I love God, His Son Jesus Christ, and my brother and mother are matthew 12:48-50

<Fair enough

>Christians, who will exist forever, avoiding the lake of fire.

<I don't know if this is miscommunication on your part, but it seems to me you are at once conveying to me that "Christians" (who I presume you think are elect human beings who actually have the capacity for the divine presence or essence, distinct from human beings that are actually animals in the form of Man, having no soul) will not suffer Hell or the Lake of Fire, (which you seem to believe is a place for the annihilation of the soul) yet they are also in danger of it:

>yet still do not repent/obey God/do His will/edify the brethern, then they surely will go to hell and then the lake of fire.

>What are you talking about?

<What are YOU talking about?

>>572301

>There is a difference between Godlyness and godlyness

<Care to differentiate for me then?

Well one is to be like a spirit. The other is to try and imitate God. Also as a adjective in the english language it is improper to capitilize it unless at the start of a sentence.

>So… You can be tormented forever then?

Yes see revelation 20:10

>Hell and the Lake of Fire are eternal punishments.

Wrong, hell is not eternal because of abraham and others in Luke 16:20-31 escaping it in 1 peter 3:19-20 and acts 2:25-31 but the lake of fire is eternal because of revelation 20.

<ALL men are as beasts

Wrong, they are beasts, not as beasts. Did you even bother believing ecclesasties 3:18?

>I said in mine heart concerning the estate of the sons of men, that God might manifest them, and that they might see that they themselves are beasts.

<we would commit no sin.

Wrong, all flesh is unjustified in the sight of God, except for Jesus of course. Read romans 3:10-20.

<But instead we are shown to be brute beasts. Is there any other way to read this?

Yes, read it literally. Humans are animals and their bodies are corrupt. For this you need a new one see 1 corinthians 15.

>but it seems to me you are at once conveying to me that "Christians" (who I presume you think are elect human beings who actually have the capacity for the divine presence or essence,

Yep.

>distinct from human beings that are actually animals in the form of Man,

Different yes.

>having no soul)

Wrong, animals have souls read revelation 16:3 and genesis 2 and genesis 5 again. They do not have the 1 corinthians 15:44 though.

>will not suffer Hell or the Lake of Fire,

Yes indeed they can't as they could never live long enough to visit it after dieing physically.

> (which you seem to believe is a place for the annihilation of the soul)

It is, but it's also a place for the annihilation of the body, and soul. Read Matthew 10:28.

>yet they are also in danger of it:

Where did I say this? Animals which turn into dust like humans in ecclesasties 3:18-21 never have the opprotunity to go to hell or heaven. Only Christians who exist forver can go into eternal life or eternal death of revelation 20.

>Well one is to be like a spirit. The other is to try and imitate God.

I don't think you're being clear enough in your explanation to me here, is Man not trying to conform his will to the image of God who is Jesus Christ when he receives the Holy Spirit? Or, do you mean when you say the latter:

>The other is to try and imitate God

Is an impotent attempt to imitate God without the guidance and power of the Holy Spirit?

>like a spirit

There are good and evil spirits.

>Yes see revelation 20:10

Yet then you later go on to say as a response to my querying:

<(which you seem to believe is a place for the annihilation of the soul)

>It is, but it's also a place for the annihilation of the body, and soul.

My man, it is either eternal torment of the soul and flesh or annihilation into oblivion of body and soul; which one is it to you?

<Hell and the Lake of Fire are eternal punishments.

>Wrong, hell is not eternal because of abraham and others in Luke 16:20-31 escaping it in 1 peter 3:19-20 and acts 2:25-31 but the lake of fire is eternal because of revelation 20.

Okay, you got me there on a semantic error, Hell and Death will be thrown into the Lake of Fire, and the Lake of Fire is eternal. I still would claim damnation is eternal however, those who were saved by Christ in Abraham's bosom died in righteousness, or at least in attempt to attain unto it in my understanding. Luke 16:19-31

<ALL men are as beasts

>Wrong, they are beasts, not as beasts. Did you even bother believing ecclesasties 3:18?

Define: as

adv.

To the same extent or degree; equally: The child sang as sweetly as a nightingale.

adv.

For instance: large carnivores, as the bear or lion.

adv.

When taken into consideration in a specified relation or form: this definition as distinguished from the second one.

I am using the first definition in that instance. Are you just going to get hung up on semantic differences all day? I hope there's a good reason behind that. Then you would later go on to confirm that you believe:

<but it seems to me you are at once conveying to me that "Christians" (who I presume you think are elect human beings who actually have the capacity for the divine presence or essence,

>Yep

<distinct from human beings that are actually animals in the form of Man,

>Different yes

<having no soul)

>Wrong, animals have souls read revelation 16:3 and genesis 2 and genesis 5 again. They do not have the 1 corinthians 15:44 though.

So clearly you differentiate between man-animals (who cannot be saved) and the elect (who have a fundamentally different soul to man-animals.) You would be the one who actually posits a difference between certain men being completely beast or depraved, and others being granted salvation for attributes entirely unknowable to men and instituted by God, inherently and irrevocably on both parts. Are you a Calvinist? Where is Free Will then? Where is choice? Free Will and Determinism can be reconciled.

<we would commit no sin

>Wrong, all flesh is unjustified in the sight of God, except for Jesus of course. Read romans 3:10-20.

Having not been stained by sin at all, and persevering in the faith after having been washed clean by the blood of the Lamb (who has not been stained by sin) are two different concepts.

<But instead we are shown to be brute beasts. Is there any other way to read this?

>Yes, read it literally. Humans are animals and their bodies are corrupt. For this you need a new one see 1 corinthians 15.

I am reading it literally, refer to my definition of "as", perhaps I'm conveying my point with too much flair that its impact and actual meaning is to nil effect.

>>572348

<will not suffer Hell or the Lake of Fire,

>Yes indeed they can't as they could never live long enough to visit it after dieing physically.

Man-animals have no souls. Got it. Your claim that animals have souls based on Revelation 16:3 is not a very strong one. Soul comes from the Koine Greek word "psuche" which can be rendered other words, such as life or mind. And the lexicon from biblehub.com renders it as "living thing(s)." Do you have any other chapters and verses that back up animals having souls? I don't see how Genesis 2 and 5 help your case, they don't mention animals having souls, 2 mentions their creation, 5 mentions the genealogies descending from Adam… Hmm I just realised, unless you mean souls as in the driver of a living organism, while a spirit is the opposite of a fleshly being, and the spirit body is sowed in the fleshly body and raised incorruptible, but a soul still drives a life in every case. This is probably what you mean. But if that's the case, the conclusion I draw here is the everyone has a soul, not everyone will have a spiritual body to go into after the first death.

>(which you seem to believe is a place for the annihilation of the so

<It is, but it's also a place for the annihilation of the body, and soul. Read Matthew 10:28.

I think I've already put forth a response to this.

>yet they are also in danger of it:

<Where did I say this? Animals which turn into dust like humans in ecclesastes 3:18-21 never have the opprotunity to go to hell or heaven. Only Christians who exist forver can go into eternal life or eternal death of revelation 20.

All men are beasts. No exceptions. Only God can grant our soul a spiritual body to go into after death, as you would agree. I would also agree that true Christians are the ones who live forever, but now we still have eternal death up in the air. In your view, you're saying that Christians had no choice in the matter of having believed in Jesus Christ as Lord and Saviour yet will pay with their immortal soul in Hell and the Lake of Fire if they do not live up to God's Will. And all of this is out of their control, they have no free will to choose. That about right? I really am trying to understand here.

>>572348

>>572631

>>572631

<like a spirit

>There are good and evil spirits.

Exactly.

>My man, it is either eternal torment of the soul and flesh

No, those that are in the flesh can not inherit the kingdom of God romans 8:8. therefore they neither can suffer forever.

>or annihilation into oblivion of body and soul;

Yea, body and soul are annihilated in the lake of fire where you are tormented forever if cast thereof.

<Man-animals have no souls.

Wrong, all animals, including the sons of men who are beasts, have souls. That is to say in Gensis 2:7 it explicitly says that men have souls. In revelation 16:3 it explicitly says animals in the sea have souls. In Genesis 7:16,22 it implies that animals on land also have souls as both "wherein the breath of life" is are mentioned.

>the conclusion I draw here is the everyone has a soul, not everyone will have a spiritual body to go into after the first death.

Exactly.

>Are you a Calvinist?

No I am a christian.

>In your view, you're saying that Christians had no choice in the matter of having believed in Jesus Christ

No they can choose to believe Him or not. The animals can't even have belief without faith which cometh by hearing romans 10:17 . But you need ears to hear and eyes to see in the first place.

>as Lord and Saviour yet will pay with their immortal soul in Hell and the Lake of Fire if they do not live up to God's Will. And all of this is out of their control, they have no free will to choose

Souls are not immortal as revelation 16:3 all the living souls in the sea died.

>Where is Free Will then? Where is choice?

It is in the ability to obey or disobey God i.e romans 13. Animals don't get that choice as they will simply seek to survive or to do programming done unto them like mkultra style indoctrination.

>>571468

>angels are called men

Well, it's not like the sodomites heh could tell the difference anyway.