Dustin Harris

The most tightly aligned with Scripture I have ever felt is now, where I consistently find myself agreeing *mostly* with various theological systems, but never *fully*, and where I feel comfortable allowing myself to ask good questions about things I’ve always assumed.

@KeithAdNauseam @ProvisionistP Amen and amen. Those verses do not necessitate Calvinism.

@PreacherWrites @ProvisionistP Luke 8:15 But the ones that fell on the good ground are those who, having heard the word with a noble and good heart, keep it and bear fruit with patience. Ezekiel 36 just expands upon Psalm 51:10 Create in me a clean heart, O God, and renew a right spirit within me.

PSA: You’re not supposed to AGREE with Paul’s hypothetical fatalistic objector in Romans 9.

@KeithAdNauseam @ProvisionistP Do I believe all of the physical descendants of Abraham will be saved? No. But its clear that some who have stumbled but haven't fallen will be saved, and therefore Romans 9 isn't about those passed over from eternity past.

@PreacherWrites @ProvisionistP Do you believe all Israel (even just at and near that time) were saved? If so, why does Paul lament in Romans 9 and 10?

@Duke456521 @KeithAdNauseam @ProvisionistP Welcome! I’ve shared it a bunch but people tend to just ignore it, even though I think it’s brilliant work and makes Romans 9-11 coherent.

@PreacherWrites @KeithAdNauseam @ProvisionistP Great article! Thank you for sharing!

@KeithAdNauseam @ProvisionistP Honestly, I think 90% of what you just said is believed by all orthodox Christians and you spun Luke 8:15 a tad and took Ezekiel out of context to fit your systematic.

@PreacherWrites @ProvisionistP Ultimately, "no one seeks God" Romans 3:10-11, our hearts are wicked Jeremiah 17:9 and we need to hear with a good heart for faith Luke 8:15 - with Ezekiel 36:26-27 saying that God will give us a new heart. If you are honest with these verses, only one reality is left.

@KeithAdNauseam @ProvisionistP If you go look at that text, the Gentiles are the ones provoking the unbelieving Jew to jealousy. And however you take 11:26, if one vessel of wrath is saved, then chapter 9 isn’t about unconditional election 🤷🏼‍♂️

@PreacherWrites @ProvisionistP Paul does point that this stumble is to "provoke jealously" and say that it is temporary, however Paul also says "all Israel will be saved" (11:26), which I'd argue requires a lot of nuance regarding definitions. I think the problem is moreso if you believe in monergisim or not

Reading a Calvinist like Oliver Crisp is proving to be quite the breath of fresh air compared to Sproul, White, and Palmer. I admire his intellectual humility.

@DZRishmawy Are you getting much initial pushback for even “rethinking” something like the atonement? I’ve found it’s one of those areas that many people cry wolf on any revisiting of language, categories, etc.

Halfway through and it is a very stimulating volume, especially because it corrects some of the way Moffitt's earlier work has been received. That said, I think in particular his highlighting of Christ's continuing work of intercession in heaven is excellent for reasserting...

@KeithAdNauseam @ProvisionistP I would agree Jesus’ appeal to unbelieving Israelites does fit Romans 9 like a glove, but not because they were unconditionally passed over from before eternity past. It was in judgment for their unbelief, and the hardening was temporary, for a purpose.

@KeithAdNauseam @ProvisionistP It kind of sidesteps my question, honestly. It seems clear that those who stumbled over the rock of offense in Romans 9 are the vessels of wrath, but also haven’t fallen in Romans 11 and Paul has hope for their salvation. Kind of hard to imagine he’d say that about reprobates.

@KeithAdNauseam @ProvisionistP Who are his people whom He foreknew in that passage, and how do they relate to the vessels of wrath in Romans 9?

@PreacherWrites @ProvisionistP I think Romans 11:2 says it best: "God has not cast away His people whom He foreknew." Romans as a whole is rather monergistic - between the golden chain, "no one seeks God", or even 10 and 11. Prov16:4 The LORD has made all for Himself, Yes, even the wicked for the day of doom.

@graham919191 @JesusDied4UToo @ProvisionistP I don't know that who you tagged above would agree with your engagement of the text though. For them, Romans 9 is about the reprobate and the elect, and God's eternal purpose of choosing one for wrath and another for mercy.

@PreacherWrites @JesusDied4UToo @ProvisionistP I agree with Calvinist on certain points, but not a hyper 5 pointer.

@Waldorfmanhaha @KeithAdNauseam @ProvisionistP 9-11 is definitely a new thought in Paul’s overarching argument. Don’t see how 8:6-10 applies to what I wrote above.

@PreacherWrites @KeithAdNauseam @ProvisionistP The concept of chosen vessels under wrath is introduced in 8:6-10. The carnal Christian remains chosen because the gifts & callings are irrevocable while the consequences are experienced. God’s purpose is inevitable, the character of my participation is dependent on my hardness.

@graham919191 @JesusDied4UToo @ProvisionistP The problem with what you are stating if you are a Calvinist, though, is that those stumbling in Romans 9 haven't fallen in Romans 11. How can they be unconditionally reprobate but also able to be grafted back in?

@graham919191 @JesusDied4UToo @ProvisionistP This is much closer to the intent of Romans 9-11 than the traditional calvinistic rendering. God is judging unbelieving Israel and accomplishing His means as a response to their sin, on the condition of unbelief, while blessing believing Gentiles and believing Israel.

@KeithAdNauseam @ProvisionistP Also, whatever the analogy means, it must fit in with the larger argument of Romans 9-11, and in chapter 11, the "vessels of wrath" of Romans 9, have stumbled, but haven't fallen, and Paul is hopeful they will repent and be grafted back in. Doesn't sound like reprobates to me.

@KeithAdNauseam @ProvisionistP Here is a great article on it. Basically the analogy is arguing that unbelieving Jews fashioned themselves in rebellion, and God has responded to that by using that rebellion to dispense wrath (on Jesus), for a good purpose. cambridge.org/core/journals/…

@KeithAdNauseam @ProvisionistP I think the response would be that the answer to "who can resist His will" is not "no one" it is actually "people resist His will all the time and God uses it for good", hence the reference to Pharaoh in the verses prior, and the reference to clay that pushes back.

@ProvisionistP I just want to know, how does Paul tackle the objector? Does He tell him of man's initiative, or of any man first idea? No. He reprimands him for questioning God, not affirming God's control. I'll entertain you: evidence your point.

We are so used to the response to Paul's interlocutor being "absolutely not" that we tend to apply that answer to this question in Romans 9: "Who can resist His will?" The issue is that Paul always assumes the opposite of the interlocutor's argument, not just "no" or "no one".

@travis_fooks Yeah for sure! In regards to the problem of the OP though, I do think determinism posits by implication that there is a chance that you are determined to believe you are elect/saved while you are actually deceived. I’m not saying that’s a tenet of reformed theology though

@PreacherWrites Fair enough. I wasn't really trying for a gospel presentation so much as hitting the main bullet points without the bullets.

One of my biggest issues with any form of determinism within Christian orthodoxy is that it, in my opinion, damages all confidence in rationality. How can I trust that I weighed the evidence rationally for, well anything, if something outside myself is the ultimate cause?