I'm going to walk all the way through Romans 9... verse by verse... to argue that it does not, in fact, teach individual election to salvation like the Calvinist theologian would teach. #bible #theology #biblicalstudies
John 15:16 “Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ordained you, that ye should go and bring forth fruit, and that your fruit should remain: that whatsoever ye shall ask of the Father in my name, he may give it you.”
@@carlnebrin who did he choose? For what purpose? This isn’t a proof-text for individual election. This is a choosing of a special group of people, set apart for a special service., that would help lead and direct the church under the leadership of the Holy Spirit. I argued about 3/4 of the way through the video (when Paul gets to the vessels for honorable and dishonorable use) that the purpose of election is two-fold, in both testaments… it is corporate and it is about usage/service/representation on this planet. It is the only way to make sense of how Paul positions salvation in Romans 10 as an act of faith on the part of the one who is choosing and declaring with their mouth “Jesus is Lord.”
@@sam_burke And why do they declare "Jesus is Lord"? Because they have faith, authored by Christ Himself, being ordained by God to eternal life. Hebrews 12:2 “Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith; who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God.” Acts 13:48 “And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed.” Ordination came first, then came faith as a result.
@@carlnebrin right and according to Romans 8, where does this ordination come from? It comes from the fore knowledge of God. Arminians don’t believe that God doesn’t predestine… They just believe that God predestines based on his foreknowledge of the choices that people will make. Predestination and election are two different things, but the Calvinist conflates the two. I know because I spent a majority of my young adult life as a Calvinist.
Good video boss. Having established the context of Paul's discussion in the light of the graft of the Gentiles to the people of the promise. 1. what is the comprehensive explanation of justification by faith in the context? You didn't go into detail about that ( Not forgetting that Jesus was also justified in the resurrection) 2. Abraham, to whom the promises were made wasn't a Jew but a gentile I.e.a Hebrew. Would he be grafted also?
@@oluwatuase_Tommy thanks! In regards to your first question, I am writing my NT Theology research paper for this semester on this very topic… “Paul’s usage of justification in Romans and its impact on the greater New Testament theological conversation.” So I’ll probably publish that paper to my website after I turn it in and then make a video on my research.
@@oluwatuase_Tommy to talk about your second question: no, Abraham was not a Jew, (that term would come much later to describe those from the southern kingdom of Judah and the keeping of early Judaism in the second temple period) but he was the chosen father of the elect people of God. His name change to Abraham even shows us this because Abraham means “high father” in Hebrew. According to Paul and James, he is the father of all who believe and are justified.
@@sam_burke okay, that would be much appreciated But so far in your research, is it leaning towards NT wright view of justification or Calvinist view of justification?
@@oluwatuase_Tommy I personally am biased toward NT Wright’s view, but I am just at the beginning of the research and am laying my biases aside to let what I discover inform me. So I don’t have any leaning from the research as of yet.
@@sam_burke yes, he was the chosen father of the elect people but God says that he would bless those who bless him and curse those who curse him. Now even the elect people who curse Abraham by unbelief in the gospel are they not cursed also. My point is was Israel really the elect people or those who would belief through faith?
Although Calvinism is definitely not correct, the question in Romans 9 isn’t a debate between whether Paul is attempting to speak of individual election or whether he’s talking instead about corporate election. Both of those are wrong. He’s actually destroying the Jews’ doctrine of election. That’s what gets missed so badly here.
