The topic is about a hypothetical situation which is not a truth at all but hypothetical, guess work.
What would you do if God revealed His plan for your life?
- Thread starter shnarkle
- Start date
True, but certainly beside the point of this OP.
Again completely irrelevant to the OP.
So again, for the third time; hypothetically speaking, IF this were revealed to you, what would you do differently, if anything? If you don't feel comfortable answering this OP's question, this isn't unusual. Most people can't begin to address it for obvious reasons. However, I'm not interested in your agenda to highjack this OP.
Quite true, but again completely beside the point of this OP.
While all things may be possible, it doesn't then follow that all things are within God's sovereign will. Therefore only what God has ordained will actually happen, and it is clearly not within God's will that wolves become sheep, or that tares become wheat. Vessels of mercy are not vessels of wrath. They are two completely different animals.
That's an interesting question. What do you think? Would it matter to you? What would you do if God did reveal you to be a vessel fitted for destruction?
I don't know. I'm not quite following the question. Why do you think this is necessarily the case?
Why not? I've literally had at least a dozen or more people logically answer the question within this paradigm that Paul himself presents in his argument.
I would disagree for the salient reason that prior to this revelation, you believe you are a vessel of mercy, and therefore may be acting according to that belief. So, you volunteer your time to feed the hungry, clothe the naked, offer alms, etc. After this revelation, you could still do those same things, or not. The revelation hasn't removed your free will, has it? If so, how or why would that be the case?
One isn't changing from one kind of vessel to another. One is discovering that they are a vessel of wrath rather than a vessel of mercy. Their perceptions have changed, not who they are. Hypnotists do something similar by suggesting that members of their audience are dogs, or from another planet, etc. They quite readily act very differently.
Kade Rystalmane
Well-known member
We have two completely different understandings of what the word "sovereign" means. However, I was just meaning to answer your question, not necessarily debate you on anything so I will leave it at that.
I would think whatever God willed me to think. It would matter if God willed me to think it mattered. If God fitted me for destruction, I would do whatever God willed me to do. That's how it works, right?
If I am free to choose how to act in response to God choosing me to be a vessel of destruction, wouldn't that mean I have the ability to choose and thus can choose to respond to God in such a way that He changes me into a vessel of righteousness?
They were only giving the answer God willed them to give...if what you believe is true. That's the only answer anyone can logically give. We aren't free, under your paradigm, to respond in any other way, or in a way we so choose if what you are saying is true.
I only believe that because decreed that I believe that and decreed that I would act accordingly. After God revealed to me that I was a vessel of destruction, I still can only do what God decreed me to do.
IF, however, I have actual free will, then the idea that I am chosen for destruction or mercy isn't a valid concept unless God is unjust. If it's actual free will, then I can choose to respond to God's gospel call and if He is just, He will change me into a vessel of mercy. If He doesn't, then He is unjust by definition.
If God has changed my perception of what I am according to His decree then I will only change how I think and act according to how He changes His decree about how I will think and act along with that change of perception. If He reveals to me that I am a vessel of destruction but does not decree that I think and act any differently, then I will continue to think and act the same.
My wife is a hypnotherapist.
And? Go on. This may be a valid point, but we'll never know until you clearly point out how you came to this conclusion, or how it is relevant to the discussion.
Which you still haven't gotten around to yet.
I would settle for simply answering the question posed in the OP.
In this case, it is God's revelation that one is a vessel fitted for destruction, and presumably this would come as a shock to those who are thinking about answering this question.
Perhaps, but the main point here is what would you do with this information?
No. This is a tautology. You are saying that if you are free to choose, then you are free to choose...etc.
This makes your will and effort the deciding factor in your own salvation. This is anathema to Paul's argument. God does not choose anyone based upon their performance or abilities. Salvation is not by works.
This is Paul's argument which he builds up to chapter 9.
Paul's argument is airtight, yet this doesn't negate one's ability to answer this simple question.
And regardless of what you do, under this situation; the result is foreordained already. Again, this is beside the point. The point here is: What would you do???? Would you live your life any differently, or continue to live it exactly the same? This isn't a complicated question.
Why? This isn't how Paul presents his argument. In fact, he begins with God's righteousness as a Given. Reread the chapters leading up to chapter 9, and you should notice that the carnal man can't please God. There is nothing anyone can do to gain salvation. The carnal man cannot repent, or make a decision to make Christ his lord and savior, and wouldn't even if he could. The clay has no say in the matter. The potter determines what he will make.
This isn't an argument. The carnal mind cannot choose to respond to the gospel EVER because the carnal mind is spiritually DEAD. Only those who are given the ears to hear can hear the gospel.
Again, Paul is clear when he says, "NOT by will or effort" Romans 9:16 Free will is not what decides your destiny. Paul doesn't care if one has free will or not. It's not relevant to his argument. He simply dismisses it altogether because it doesn't matter. No one can will themselves to love God, or follow his commandments in their heart. Only God can do that. Only God can create a vessel of mercy, or a vessel fitted for destruction.
Another tautology.
And if he decrees that you act differently then you will act differently. So what? That's not the point of the OP. The question remains unanswered.
Perhaps if I put it another way. Knowing that you're damned without repentance, is there still any point in continuing to live as if you had a chance at salvation? If so, why? If not, why not?
My wife is a hypnotherapist.
Kade Rystalmane
Well-known member
I think I've made an erroneous assumption here, and if I have, forgive me. Do you, personally, hold to the Calvinist belief of sovereign determinism? If not (and I certainly don't), then I understand where your question is coming from, but don't think you'll get a meaningful response from those who do hold to it. If you do hold to Calvinism, then no one can answer your question in any meaningful fashion and your question contradicts the Calvinistic paradigm.
You've made a number of errors. The most notable one of assuming that this OP is asking for anything other than an answer to the question posed.
This isn't about me personally.
This OP doesn't prevent anyone from believing whatever they please. One's beliefs do not prevent anyone from answering this simple question.
Again, this is neither here nor there.
There is nothing preventing a Calvinist from answering the question anymore than anyone else.
Obviously, you have no intention of answering the question. Thanks anyways, but I'm not interested in going on any more wild goose chases.
So reading the title for the thread I thought maybe interesting. Then I found it's really a Calvinistic approach to condition people to say If your Calvinistic way of thinking was true and you found out you were a vessel of destruction at no choice of your own......
Well your question of IF doesn't make sense because it's not true anyway. At least in my opinion. I think therefore it takes people down a road of needlessly saying not so nice things about the Creator over a hypothetical that's unjustified.
Or to put it this way. Why should people seek to answer a question like what would you do if you discovered your spouse was unfaithful? Why is it that I should even allow my imagination to go down that road? Love believes the best of another and won't give it a second thought. Allowing the mind to question your spouse or even God for no fair reason isn't honoring either of them.
Well your question of IF doesn't make sense because it's not true anyway. At least in my opinion. I think therefore it takes people down a road of needlessly saying not so nice things about the Creator over a hypothetical that's unjustified.
Or to put it this way. Why should people seek to answer a question like what would you do if you discovered your spouse was unfaithful? Why is it that I should even allow my imagination to go down that road? Love believes the best of another and won't give it a second thought. Allowing the mind to question your spouse or even God for no fair reason isn't honoring either of them.
It does if one of your beliefs is it's not honoring the one you love......again if you asked me what would I do if my spouse was unfaithful I'd tell you it's in poor taste for you to seek to direct my mind that way and give such meditation.
False. I'm not engaging in some conditioning program at all. I'm simply using Paul's own hypothetical question in Romans 9 to springboard a logical question to anyone who cares to answer it. Evidently, you would rather pick apart the OP than actually answer it. Again, this isn't surprising at all.
As Paul would point out, the potter is the one with the power to determine what to do with the clay.
It makes perfect sense. It's Paul's IF, and his argument is flawless.
Fallacy of Begging the Question.
Bingo.
Strawman argument. Again, this is NOT Paul's argument. Paul's argument assumes God's righteousness and the fact that he is justified in determining the purpose and eternal destiny of each lump of clay he creates.
As I have pointed out repeatedly, it isn't a pleasant idea to entertain in the first place. Hence my request that people simply answer the question rather than pretending to answer the question, or thinking it appropriate to go on some wild goose chase.
So that excludes your belief that I am in any way suggesting anything less than the best from God or His creation.
Again, this is nothing less than a blatant Strawman argument. There is nothing in this OP that suggests you need to question God's judgements. In fact, I am presenting a hypothetical situation where God is justified in his condemnation. The fact is that this is also right in line with Paul's argument which points out that the whole world is lost, and deserving of damnation. It is only through God's grace, which has nothing to do with anything you may have ever done, or will ever do. You can't bribe God with good works to save you.
The OP is exclusively dealing with Paul's argument in his letter to the Romans which means you can banish any and all Calvinistic ideas from your mind.
Given these facts, you should have no problem answering the question, especially since I am not presenting anything of a Calvinistic nature to begin with.
Well, I've got some really bad news for you. There is quite a bit of adultery and fornication going on in your bible. Do you also feel that God's word is in bad taste for broaching these subjects?
Jesus doesn't hide from unpleasant subjects either. He walks right up to adulterers, and engages them in conversation on the very subject of their adultery. Bad taste? I don't think so. Creeping away, hiding, or trying to sugar coat the realities of a fallen world is not just in bad taste, it's immoral.
God didn't do any of those things and neither has my wife. It's like you're wanting to create hypotheticals what if either one of the two of them did something wrong. I say we don't even have to entertain the notion.
Again they're NOTHING to do with what God has done. In fact they're reported as warnings to keep you away from them.
I think I did actually answer your question. I told you God wouldn't do something like that anyway so your question is invalid.
And Jerimiah pointed out in 18:1-11 that the clay is given the choice. And the Jerimiah passage is the MOTHER text on this theme of the Potter not Romans 9!
The word which came to Jeremiah from the LORD, saying, Arise, and go down to the potter's house, and there I will cause thee to hear my words. Then I went down to the potter's house, and, behold, he wrought a work on the wheels. And the vessel that he made of clay was marred in the hand of the potter: so he made it again another vessel, as seemed good to the potter to make it. Then the word of the LORD came to me, saying, O house of Israel, cannot I do with you as this potter? saith the LORD. Behold, as the clay is in the potter's hand, so are ye in mine hand, O house of Israel. At what instant I shall speak concerning a nation, and concerning a kingdom, to pluck up, and to pull down, and to destroy it; If that nation, against whom I have pronounced, turn from their evil, I will repent of the evil that I thought to do unto them. And at what instant I shall speak concerning a nation, and concerning a kingdom, to build and to plant it; If it do evil in my sight, that it obey not my voice, then I will repent of the good, wherewith I said I would benefit them. Now therefore go to, speak to the men of Judah, and to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, saying, Thus saith the LORD; Behold, I frame evil against you, and devise a device against you: return ye now every one from his evil way, and make your ways and your doings good. Jer 18: 1,11
The clay had a choice. You're wanting to make it seem like it didn't.
More straw. This really isn't about God or your wife. It's simply asking what would you do if it was revealed to you by God that YOU were a vessel fitted for destruction.
Not at all. In fact, I'm simply repeating Paul's hypothetical, which is:
"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:"
That's the only hypothetical case I'm referring to.
I haven't forgotten what your position is, nor the fact that it has nothing to do with this OP.
Again, "For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.
14How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?"
Paul points out that there were plenty of false gospels going out which he cursed. That's NOT hypothetical at all. That's the reality, and therefore, those who cannot hear, cannot believe in the first place.
Again, this is about what YOU would do, not anyone else.
And warnings are useless to those who rely upon their own will or effort Romans 9:16. God can stretch out his loving arms for generations and be ignored, yet be discovered by those who never bothered to look at all. Romans 10:20,21
So, some might say, what difference does it make? Plenty if one understands Paul's argument which assumed the righteousness of God as a Given (Romans 9:14). This OP does as well so if it is at all possible, please try to entertain what is actually being presented rather than these pointless claims to the contrary.
Which was: " what would YOU do if God, without repentance; revealed to YOU that YOU were one of these vessels fitted for destruction?
See the problem yet? This doesn't begin to answer the question. In fact, this is blatantly ignoring the question altogether, and highjacking the OP. Now that's what I call bad taste.
Yet Paul points out that it doesn't matter if he did do something like that. Here it is again: "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:"
Go ahead and invalidate Paul's argument. I'm sure there are a lot of people who would like to see you try.
Regardless, the fact remains that the OP is drawing on what Paul actually states in HIS letter. Here's what Paul states:
"19Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will?"
This alone refutes your claim as Paul is presenting a certain response which is clearly NOT one in which God would repent of the good he would do were Israel to repent. He further goes on to confirm this fact by telling them to shut up for being so insolent.
"20Nay 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?"
His next question refutes your claim by pointing out that the potter certainly DOES have the power to make vessels of destruction.
21Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?
It's a rhetorical question. God certainly does have the power.
IF??? A blatant hypothetical which you have already stated you CAN'T begin to address, yet here you are addressing it as if it's the best hypothetical in the world. Double standard, much?
The clay fitted for destruction cannot repent. Paul quite clearly points out that nothing the carnal man does will EVER please God.
"7Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.8So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God." Romans 8:7,8
Sorry to disappoint, but Paul isn't making a hypothetical claim here, and he uses this point to build his argument which leads inevitably to his claims in chapter 9; most notably that a just and righteous God is most definitely just in damning those vessels fitted for destruction. The only question which remains, and is as yet still unanswered is; what would you do IF you were one of those vessels?
Let me add that this is an incomprehensibly important question to address now rather than on Judgment Day. That wide highway to hell is packed full of people who just just plainly couldn't begin to deal with the possibility that they might not actually be saved at all.
I'm not in any way suggesting that you are damned. I'm simply suggesting Paul's hypothetical argument is pure genius, and we can get a much better glimpse of just what he's saying by answering the question posed in this OP which again, is right in line with Paul's argument, and his hypothetical question.
Faith is all one needs to answer the question. Anything less is sin. Romans 14:23
Interested in Gods plan? -- Without repentance God can do noting in you at all. Problem in Christendom is they are not thorough in repentance to become like Him and in His same image, perfect even as your Father in heaven is perfect, walk as He walk in His same light, have the mind of Christ, He in you and you in Him as one as Jesus was one in Him, John 17.
Repentance is from self and become as He is. Most do not even know what Gods SPirit is. Do you?
Sorry but life doesn't work that way of answering and framing question to get answers on just how you demand them . They tried that with Jesus one time.....is it right to pay taxes to Ceaser or not.....they wanted a YES or NO, not him bringing up the image on a coin. So A or B Jesus. He gave them neither but he did answer their question whether they wanted to acknowledge it or not. I answered your question to. I told you God wouldn't ever do what you said anyway. (that is on this particular matter)
I think I can do so easily but it's not Paul's argument I need to challenge but your interpretation of what Paul meant.
Does not. You're getting the cart before the horse. If a person by an act of their will or a nation chooses rebellion he has a right to form it into a vessel of destruction and that's even what Jerimiah said.
And yet Paul's argument works exactly that way. Again, Paul simply assumes it as a Given, and then proceeds to point out that one's "will and effort" are of no use whatsoever. Romans 9:16. Q.E.D.
Evidently, you didn't understand what Jesus was saying. The answer is clear. Give Caesar ALL of his money! Note that Jesus has to ask them to hand him a coin. Why? Because he has no money! Didn't you catch that? Elsewhere in Luke's gospel, he quite clearly points out that unless you get rid of all that worthless money from your god Mammon, "you cannot be one of my disciples" It really doesn't get much clearer than that. Lest anyone claim that he was using hyperbole, Luke follows up by showing us that the church took his words literally, e.g. Acts 2:44
Yep, he said to give to Caesar what is rightfully his, and that would be ALL of Caesar's money. Ironically, his answer was treasonous, and could have been used against him.
No. You didn't. Again, the question is: What would YOU do if God revealed to you that you were a vessel fitted for destruction? Again, until one is called, chosen, and given the gift of repentance, they are automatically damned. No one is saved in their mother's womb. If that were the case then there would be no need for anyone to repent due to the fact that they're already saved, right?
Was there no point in your life when you made some profession of faith to document that you were saved? Were you ever baptized? The only argument you can have is to claim that you were never damned, and have always been in a state of undefiled salvation.
I haven't forgotten what you've posted. Repeating yourself doesn't advance the discussion in the slightest.
I think you're in denial. If it's so easy, I dare you to try and answer the question posted in the OP.
It's the exact same argument Paul is presenting.
I'm using the exact same hypothetical argument Paul is using with HIS interpretation. Unless you're claiming that you were saved prior to being conceived, I have no idea what you're trying to prove. Is no one ever saved? That's the only way your argument makes any sense, and that's certainly not what Paul is arguing.
This isn't complicated. People are lost. Jesus comes to save the lost. I'm sure we can both agree on that simple statement, no??? If so, then it's a Given that there must come a point in one's life when they make that leap of faith from being damned to becoming a new creation, no???
If you agree to that, then you should have no problem answering the question because everyone begins this journey from a fallen position in sin. It's a Given!
By the same token, if a person or nation, by "will or effort" chooses obedience, God has the right to form them into vessels of mercy. Unfortunately, that's a works based salvation which Paul roundly condemns. So you really are going to have to come up with something better than that.
Again, look at what Paul says in Romans chapter 8. He's quite clear in pointing out that there is NOTHING you can do that will ever please God. It is only what Christ does that God is pleased with.
"It is by Grace, through faith, and that NOT OF YOURSELVES, NOT of works, lest anyone boast".
There is nothing anyone can do to save themselves. No one is justified by the works of the law. Until you get that fact straight, there is no common ground for this discussion.
Is not. The people asked what MUST WE DO to work the works of God? They asked him about what THEY needed to do. They were told,
"Do not work (their doing something) for food that spoils, but for food that endures to eternal life, which the Son of Man will give you. For on him God the Father has placed his seal of approval.” Then they asked him, “What must we do (their doing something) to do the works God requires?” Jesus answered, “The work of God is this: to believe in the one he has sent.” John 6:27
That's something THEY needed to do not something that God did for them! But you say a works based salvation? Nope. Context, context, context.....when Paul spoke about us not being saved by works he was referring to seeking to be saved by keeping the works of the law, nothing to do with just a simple declaration to believe God by faith. This is where Calvinism makes it's big mistake not understanding this.
Thanks for taking us on this wild goose chase. I'm done.