The Myth of saying that Jesus Christ died for all men without exception !

[Eternally Grateful]

Yes, that's exactly what false teachers do, deny that Christ is real and really God. How does that change what I said?

That what NON BELIEVERS do, and it WHY NON BELIeVERS do not have Christ or the father

Its not just false teachers, there are some false teachers who claim they do believe in Christ, they just have no faith in him (see James 2), that’s where your wrong

 

[CadyandZoe]

Except that isn't the answer the Bible gives us.
Acts 7:51
In fact, the majority of the OT is about people resisting God's will and being punished for it. And the Potter and clay analogy is a good place to settle this issue, because it's laid out very clearly in Isaiah.

13 The Lord says:

“These people come near to me with their mouth
and honor me with their lips,
but their hearts are far from me.
Their worship of me
is based on merely human rules they have been taught.
14 Therefore once more I will astound these people
with wonder upon wonder;
the wisdom of the wise will perish,
the intelligence of the intelligent will vanish.”
15 Woe to those who go to great depths
to hide their plans from the Lord,
who do their work in darkness and think,
“Who sees us? Who will know?”
16 You turn things upside down,
as if the potter were thought to be like the clay!
Shall what is formed say to the one who formed it,
“You did not make me”?
Can the pot say to the potter,
“You know nothing”?

Here's the amusing thing about these potter and clay verses, here and in Jerimiah (where Paul obviously stole them from) They are both about God telling people that they are resisting his will! The Calvinists are exactly like the one talking back and turning things upside down and claiming no one resists God's will when God is saying the opposite! It's crazy! How can anyone miss this?

"This is the word that came to Jeremiah from the Lord: 2 “Go down to the potter’s house, and there I will give you my message.” 3 So I went down to the potter’s house, and I saw him working at the wheel. 4 But the pot he was shaping from the clay was marred in his hands; so the potter formed it into another pot, shaping it as seemed best to him.

5 Then the word of the Lord came to me. 6 He said, “Can I not do with you, Israel, as this potter does?” declares the Lord. “Like clay in the hand of the potter, so are you in my hand, Israel. 7 If at any time I announce that a nation or kingdom is to be uprooted, torn down and destroyed, 8 and if that nation I warned repents of its evil, then I will relent and not inflict on it the disaster I had planned. 9 And if at another time I announce that a nation or kingdom is to be built up and planted, 10 and if it does evil in my sight and does not obey me, then I will reconsider the good I had intended to do for it.

11 “Now therefore say to the people of Judah and those living in Jerusalem, ‘This is what the Lord says: Look! I am preparing a disaster for you and devising a plan against you. So turn from your evil ways, each one of you, and reform your ways and your actions.’ 12 But they will reply, ‘It’s no use. We will continue with our own plans; we will all follow the stubbornness of our evil hearts.’”

How can anyone read this and say" "Oh, well, no one resist's God's will?

Okay, now make sense of Paul's argument in Romans 9. If, as you say, Paul "stole" these verses, how do they support his assertion that "it does NOT depend on the man who wills . . ." Isn't your argument that salvation depends on man's free-will choice? Why does Paul make a claim to the contrary? According to Paul, it doesn't depend on a man's free-will choice.

19 You will say to me then, “Why does He still find fault? For who resists His will?”

You and I both know the answer. Everyone resists God's will. He admitted this in chapter 3. But here in chapter 9, Paul is making a different point based on a different promise God made to Israel as a nation. And this is a major theme in both Isaiah and Jeremiah. Consider the following verse from the New Covenant Passage of Jeremiah 31,

34 They will not teach again, each man his neighbor and each man his brother, saying, ‘Know the Lord,’ for they will all know Me, from the least of them to the greatest of them,” declares the Lord, “for I will forgive their iniquity, and their sin I will remember no more.”

Based on this promise, that each man will "know" the Lord, those who oppose Paul's Gospel will raise this as an objection. "Paul, if what you teach is true, then why do we find some in Israel who refuse to "know" the Lord, which is to say, 'enter the New Covenant'? Doesn't the fact that some in Israel have refused to enter the New Covenant discredit your teaching that we are living during the time of the New Covenant?"

So then, Paul's argument opens with Chapter 9:6, where Paul begins to explain why his gospel doesn't imply or lead one to the conclusion that God's promise to Israel has failed. First he argues that Jeremiah's word to Israel does not apply to each and every one of Jacob's descendants. And the reason why some of them have not entered into the New Covenant, according to Paul's gospel, is due to the fact that God has hardened some of them, which is why it doesn't depend on the man who wills.

In this context, the rhetorical question found in verse 19, leads into Paul's explanation for why God is not unjust for hardening men's hearts so that they will refuse to enter the new covenant. He essentially argues that our evaluation of justice, in this case, must account for the disparity between God and man with regard to their state of being. Remember, Paul isn't quoting Isaiah or Jeremiah; his opponents are. "You will say to me then . . ." postulates something his opponents would say. They would quote Isaiah and Jeremiah in support of their position. So Paul moves the discourse beyond that point to consider the realities of the transcendent creator.

20 On the contrary, who are you, O man, who answers back to God?

This sounds like Paul is scolding the reader but in fact he is asking the reader to consider the quiddity of man. What are you? Are you not a created thing? If man is indeed a created thing, then how do we evaluate the justice or injustice of God's act to harden certain people? And Paul is asking, us to consider that a creator has the right to do with his creation whatever he wants. The "rightness" of a creator's action must be evaluated from his standpoint as the creator. The "rightness" of a created thing is evaluated in terms of the purpose it serves, which is why Paul ends his argument with a statement of God's purpose.

God hardens some hearts in order to serve his creative purpose, and his creative purpose is to demonstrate certain aspects of his character: His wrath and his mercy.

22 What if God, although willing to demonstrate His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction? 23 And He did so to make known the riches of His glory upon vessels of mercy, which He prepared beforehand for glory, 24 even us, whom He also called, not from among Jews only, but also from among Gentiles.

 

[Eternally Grateful]

Okay, now make sense of Paul's argument in Romans 9. If, as you say, Paul "stole" these verses, how do they support his assertion that "it does NOT depend on the man who wills . . ." Isn't your argument that salvation depends on man's free-will choice? Why does Paul make a claim to the contrary? According to Paul, it doesn't depend on a man's free-will choice.

19 You will say to me then, “Why does He still find fault? For who resists His will?”

You and I both know the answer. Everyone resists God's will. He admitted this in chapter 3. But here in chapter 9, Paul is making a different point based on a different promise God made to Israel as a nation. And this is a major theme in both Isaiah and Jeremiah. Consider the following verse from the New Covenant Passage of Jeremiah 31,

34 They will not teach again, each man his neighbor and each man his brother, saying, ‘Know the Lord,’ for they will all know Me, from the least of them to the greatest of them,” declares the Lord, “for I will forgive their iniquity, and their sin I will remember no more.”

Based on this promise, that each man will "know" the Lord, those who oppose Paul's Gospel will raise this as an objection. "Paul, if what you teach is true, then why do we find some in Israel who refuse to "know" the Lord, which is to say, 'enter the New Covenant'? Doesn't the fact that some in Israel have refused to enter the New Covenant discredit your teaching that we are living during the time of the New Covenant?"

So then, Paul's argument opens with Chapter 9:6, where Paul begins to explain why his gospel doesn't imply or lead one to the conclusion that God's promise to Israel has failed. First he argues that Jeremiah's word to Israel does not apply to each and every one of Jacob's descendants. And the reason why some of them have not entered into the New Covenant, according to Paul's gospel, is due to the fact that God has hardened some of them, which is why it doesn't depend on the man who wills.

In this context, the rhetorical question found in verse 19, leads into Paul's explanation for why God is not unjust for hardening men's hearts so that they will refuse to enter the new covenant. He essentially argues that our evaluation of justice, in this case, must account for the disparity between God and man with regard to their state of being. Remember, Paul isn't quoting Isaiah or Jeremiah; his opponents are. "You will say to me then . . ." postulates something his opponents would say. They would quote Isaiah and Jeremiah in support of their position. So Paul moves the discourse beyond that point to consider the realities of the transcendent creator.

20 On the contrary, who are you, O man, who answers back to God?

This sounds like Paul is scolding the reader but in fact he is asking the reader to consider the quiddity of man. What are you? Are you not a created thing? If man is indeed a created thing, then how do we evaluate the justice or injustice of God's act to harden certain people? And Paul is asking, us to consider that a creator has the right to do with his creation whatever he wants. The "rightness" of a creator's action must be evaluated from his standpoint as the creator. The "rightness" of a created thing is evaluated in terms of the purpose it serves, which is why Paul ends his argument with a statement of God's purpose.

God hardens some hearts in order to serve his creative purpose, and his creative purpose is to demonstrate certain aspects of his character: His wrath and his mercy.

22 What if God, although willing to demonstrate His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction? 23 And He did so to make known the riches of His glory upon vessels of mercy, which He prepared beforehand for glory, 24 even us, whom He also called, not from among Jews only, but also from among Gentiles.

Romans 9 from a fatalistic view is wrong

paul is explaining how God did not make a mistake by picking the jews, his whole argument is based on that.

so using it to declare one baby was predestined to heaven and the other to hell before they were born is taking it out of context,

 

[Renniks]

In the final analysis, does perseverance in faith depend on our free-will choices alone?
What must

Not alone, no. It depends on our reliance on God and God keeping us. It's mutual, not a one way street either way.

 

[fellow]

Um, creating everything makes God the author of everything we do? How? Not if we have any autonomy at all. God gave us dominion over some stuff. He not just moving all of us like pawns on a chess board.

that is so true!

 

[fellow]

Not alone, no. It depends on our reliance on God and God keeping us. It's mutual, not a one way street either way.

so true

 

[Renniks]

22 What if God, although willing to demonstrate His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction? 23 And He did so to make known the riches of His glory upon vessels of mercy, which He prepared beforehand for glory, 24 even us, whom He also called, not from among Jews only, but also from among Gentiles.

Yes, it's saying God used israel's rebellion to reach the gentiles. He hardened them farther to that end. But they didn't fall beyond recovery. See Romans 11:11.

Paul in Romans 9 is saying God has the right to bring about salvation for all through his people however he wants.
It's not about individual election.

 

[Eternally Grateful]

Not alone, no. It depends on our reliance on God and God keeping us. It's mutual, not a one way street either way.

So it is God keeping us, Not us keeping ourselves.

Which is it? You seem to be contradictory in what you believe

 

[FHII]

Oh my goodness.. Renniks: have fun in la la land. I no longer have the patience to deal with you.

Sorry... That came off as a bit harsh. Frustration got the better of me. I maintain that John was not directly talking about false teachers. He doesn't do so in any of his epistles. If I am wrong, please direct me to where he specifically points them out as both Peter and Paul did.

I wish you well Renniks. I simply don't see the point in conversing further about this particular point as I don't see any evidence that what you say is correct.

 

[brightfame52]

Yeah, that's what I was responding to.

Explain it to me then, outline my points.

 

[Tong2020]

Yes, it's saying God used israel's rebellion to reach the gentiles. He hardened them farther to that end. But they didn't fall beyond recovery. See Romans 11:11.

Paul in Romans 9 is saying God has the right to bring about salvation for all through his people however he wants.
It's not about individual election.

In Romans 11:7, it says of Israel, the others were hardened. You say that God hardened them but they didn’t fall beyond recovery. Please expound on that.

How do you take that with Romans 11:25?

Tong
R1996

 

[CharismaticLady]

Another popular Myth in the religious world today, is the Jesus Christ died or gave His Life for everyone in the world without exception, but the problem with that, is there is not one shred of scripture evidence that states that.

"2 And He Himself is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the whole world."

"16 For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. 17 For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved."

 

[CharismaticLady]

Thats error. The world is the Sheep, or the Church. Not everyone without exception. Jesus didnt pray for everyone without exception either Jn 17:9

9 I pray for them: I pray not for the world, but for them which thou hast given me; for they are thine.

Calvin in error on that point if thats what he wrote

verse 9 is about the apostles. Later He prays for those who believe their word:

verse 20 “I do not pray for these alone, but also for those who will believe in Me through their word.

Whenever you see the words "given me" it is regarding the Father predestining the apostles. Calvinists apply those words to Calvinists.

 

[Renniks]

So it is God keeping us, Not us keeping ourselves.

Which is it? You seem to be contradictory in what you believe

It's both. God isn't going to keep anyone against their will, though.

 

[Eternally Grateful]

It's both. God isn't going to keep anyone against their will, though.

Never said they would

god never fails, so those who truly trust in him would never even think of losing faith in him as far as salvation goes, and even if they did, god goes after them, his true sheep hear his voice and follow. Only those who were never saved continue to walk away, that’s what Joh tried to tell you but you will not listen

either way, you can’t say it is God who keeps you, then claim God may fail, like your proclaiming,

you contradict yourself

 

[Renniks]

In Romans 11:7, it says of Israel, the others were hardened. You say that God hardened them but they didn’t fall beyond recovery. Please expound on that.

How do you take that with Romans 11:25?

Tong
R1996

What's to expound? I just said what Romans 11:25 says. Romans 9 isn't talking about God restricting grace to certain individuals, which is why I find it so frustrating that so many people read it that way. It's the opposite! It's God saying "Ok, fine, Israel screwed up, so I'm making it easier for the rest of the world to find me, through their rebellion!" It's brilliant and merciful and redemptive. It's certainly not God picking certain individuals for his baseball team, and telling others to get lost.
"It is not as though God’s word had failed. For not all who are descended from Israel are Israel."

 

[Tong2020]

Tong2020 said: ↑
In Romans 11:7, it says of Israel, the others were hardened. You say that God hardened them but they didn’t fall beyond recovery. Please expound on that.

How do you take that with Romans 11:25?

What's to expound? I just said what Romans 11:25 says. Romans 9 isn't talking about God restricting grace to certain individuals, which is why I find it so frustrating that so many people read it that way. It's the opposite! It's God saying "Ok, fine, Israel screwed up, so I'm making it easier for the rest of the world to find me, through their rebellion!" It's brilliant and merciful and redemptive. It's certainly not God picking certain individuals for his baseball team, and telling others to get lost.
"It is not as though God’s word had failed. For not all who are descended from Israel are Israel."

What I was asking of you is to expound regarding hardened Israel (except the elect remnant), on what you meant when you said “they didn’t fall beyond recovery”. Also, I was asking you to tell us how you take what you mean there with Romans 11:25.

Tong
R1999

 

[Eternally Grateful]

What's to expound? I just said what Romans 11:25 says. Romans 9 isn't talking about God restricting grace to certain individuals, which is why I find it so frustrating that so many people read it that way. It's the opposite! It's God saying "Ok, fine, Israel screwed up, so I'm making it easier for the rest of the world to find me, through their rebellion!" It's brilliant and merciful and redemptive. It's certainly not God picking certain individuals for his baseball team, and telling others to get lost.
"It is not as though God’s word had failed. For not all who are descended from Israel are Israel."

Its not this either

Paul is arguing the fact that God did not screw up, the gospel was always going to go the the gentiles also, that what the end of 9 and Romans 10 says

 

[Renniks]

What I was asking of you is to expound regarding hardened Israel (except the elect remnant), on what you meant when you said “they didn’t fall beyond recovery”.

They all had the opportunity for salvation.

What I was asking of you is to expound regarding hardened Israel (except the elect remnant), on what you meant when you said “they didn’t fall beyond recovery”. Also, I was asking you to tell us how you take what you mean there with Romans 11:25.

Tong
R1999

Ok, Romans 11main point as far as this discussion:
According to Paul,, “the rest” who are not elect and not “chosen” can be saved. In fact, many of them will be saved
It is specifically “the rest,” described in detail in the immediately preceding paragraph (Rom 10:16-21), that God has not rejected. But how to be sure? Simple. Follow the pronouns in Romans 11 to see what Paul himself actually says about “the rest.” God loves them. He shows mercy to them. He desires that they be saved. Some of them can and will be saved.

1I say then, God has not rejected His people, has He? May it never be! For I too am an Israelite, a descendant of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin. 2God has not rejected His people whom He foreknew. Or do you not know what the Scripture says in the passage about Elijah, how he pleads with God against Israel? 3“Lord, they have killed Your prophets, they have torn down Your altars, and I alone am left, and they are seeking my life.” 4But what is the divine response to him? “I have kept for Myself seven thousand men who have not bowed the knee to Baal.” 5In the same way then, there has also come to be at the present time a remnant according to God’s gracious choice. 6But if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works, otherwise grace is no longer grace. 7What then? What Israel is seeking, it has not obtained, but those who were chosen obtained it, and the rest were hardened; 8just as it is written, “God gave them a spirit of stupor, Eyes to see not and ears to hear not, Down to this very day.” 9And David says, “Let their table become a snare and a trap, And a stumbling block and a retribution to them.10Let their eyes be darkened to see not, And bend their backs forever.” 11I say then, they did not stumble so as to fall, did they? May it never be! But by their transgression salvation has come to the Gentiles, to make them jealous. 12Now if their transgression is riches for the world and their failure is riches for the Gentiles, how much more will their fulfillment be! 13But I am speaking to you who are Gentiles. Inasmuch then as I am an apostle of Gentiles, I magnify my ministry, 14if somehow I might move to jealousy my fellow countrymen and save some of them. 15For if their rejection is the reconciliation of the world, what will their acceptance be but life from the dead? 16If the first piece of dough is holy, the lump is also; and if the root is holy, the branches are too. 17But if some of the branches were broken off, and you, being a wild olive, were grafted in among them and became partaker with them of the rich root of the olive tree, 18do not be arrogant toward the branches; but if you are arrogant, remember that it is not you who supports the root, but the root supports you. 19You will say then, “Branches were broken off so that I might be grafted in.” 20Quite right, they were broken off for their unbelief, but you stand by your faith. Do not be conceited, but fear; 21for if God did not spare the natural branches, He will not spare you, either. 22Behold then the kindness and severity of God; to those who fell, severity, but to you, God’s kindness, if you continue in His kindness; otherwise you also will be cut off. 23And they also, if they do not continue in their unbelief, will be grafted in, for God is able to graft them in again. 24For if you were cut off from what is by nature a wild olive tree, and were grafted contrary to nature into a cultivated olive tree, how much more will these who are the natural branches be grafted into their own olive tree? … 28From the standpoint of the gospel they are enemies for your sake, but from the standpoint of God’s choice they are beloved for the sake of the fathers; 29for the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable. 30For just as you once were disobedient to God, but now have been shown mercy because of their disobedience, 31so these also now have been disobedient, that because of the mercy shown to you they also may now be shown mercy. 32For God has shut up all in disobedience so that He may show mercy to all.

The Calvinist system is foreign to Paul and twists Paul’s terms to mean things that they never meant. Same goes for expressions like “vessels of wrath” that for Calvin meant reprobate and irreversibly predestined to hell; whereas for Paul it simply meant presently under God’s wrath but able to come out from under that wrath through faith in the Gospel (cf. Rom 2:4-5). In fact, for Paul all believers were once “vessels of wrath” (Rom 1:18-3:20; cf. Eph 2:3)! In other words, if the so-called “reprobate” can be and are being saved and grafted into the Olive Tree, then there is no such thing as the “reprobate” as Calvinism understands the term.

 

[Tong2020]

Tong2020 said: ↑
What I was asking of you is to expound regarding hardened Israel (except the elect remnant), on what you meant when you said “they didn’t fall beyond recovery”. Also, I was asking you to tell us how you take what you mean there with Romans 11:25.

Ok, Romans 11main point as far as this discussion:
According to Paul,, “the rest” who are not elect and not “chosen” can be saved. In fact, many of them will be saved
It is specifically “the rest,” described in detail in the immediately preceding paragraph (Rom 10:16-21), that God has not rejected. But how to be sure? Simple. Follow the pronouns in Romans 11 to see what Paul himself actually says about “the rest.” God loves them. He shows mercy to them. He desires that they be saved. Some of them can and will be saved.

1I say then, God has not rejected His people, has He? May it never be! For I too am an Israelite, a descendant of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin. 2God has not rejected His people whom He foreknew. Or do you not know what the Scripture says in the passage about Elijah, how he pleads with God against Israel? 3“Lord, they have killed Your prophets, they have torn down Your altars, and I alone am left, and they are seeking my life.” 4But what is the divine response to him? “I have kept for Myself seven thousand men who have not bowed the knee to Baal.” 5In the same way then, there has also come to be at the present time a remnant according to God’s gracious choice. 6But if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works, otherwise grace is no longer grace. 7What then? What Israel is seeking, it has not obtained, but those who were chosen obtained it, and the rest were hardened; 8just as it is written, “God gave them a spirit of stupor, Eyes to see not and ears to hear not, Down to this very day.” 9And David says, “Let their table become a snare and a trap, And a stumbling block and a retribution to them.10Let their eyes be darkened to see not, And bend their backs forever.” 11I say then, they did not stumble so as to fall, did they? May it never be! But by their transgression salvation has come to the Gentiles, to make them jealous. 12Now if their transgression is riches for the world and their failure is riches for the Gentiles, how much more will their fulfillment be! 13But I am speaking to you who are Gentiles. Inasmuch then as I am an apostle of Gentiles, I magnify my ministry, 14if somehow I might move to jealousy my fellow countrymen and save some of them. 15For if their rejection is the reconciliation of the world, what will their acceptance be but life from the dead? 16If the first piece of dough is holy, the lump is also; and if the root is holy, the branches are too. 17But if some of the branches were broken off, and you, being a wild olive, were grafted in among them and became partaker with them of the rich root of the olive tree, 18do not be arrogant toward the branches; but if you are arrogant, remember that it is not you who supports the root, but the root supports you. 19You will say then, “Branches were broken off so that I might be grafted in.” 20Quite right, they were broken off for their unbelief, but you stand by your faith. Do not be conceited, but fear; 21for if God did not spare the natural branches, He will not spare you, either. 22Behold then the kindness and severity of God; to those who fell, severity, but to you, God’s kindness, if you continue in His kindness; otherwise you also will be cut off. 23And they also, if they do not continue in their unbelief, will be grafted in, for God is able to graft them in again. 24For if you were cut off from what is by nature a wild olive tree, and were grafted contrary to nature into a cultivated olive tree, how much more will these who are the natural branches be grafted into their own olive tree? … 28From the standpoint of the gospel they are enemies for your sake, but from the standpoint of God’s choice they are beloved for the sake of the fathers; 29for the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable. 30For just as you once were disobedient to God, but now have been shown mercy because of their disobedience, 31so these also now have been disobedient, that because of the mercy shown to you they also may now be shown mercy. 32For God has shut up all in disobedience so that He may show mercy to all.

The Calvinist system is foreign to Paul and twists Paul’s terms to mean things that they never meant. Same goes for expressions like “vessels of wrath” that for Calvin meant reprobate and irreversibly predestined to hell; whereas for Paul it simply meant presently under God’s wrath but able to come out from under that wrath through faith in the Gospel (cf. Rom 2:4-5). In fact, for Paul all believers were once “vessels of wrath” (Rom 1:18-3:20; cf. Eph 2:3)! In other words, if the so-called “reprobate” can be and are being saved and grafted into the Olive Tree, then there is no such thing as the “reprobate” as Calvinism understands the term.

Interesting points.

Paul was clear on the fact that God has not cast away His people, that is Israel, whom He foreknew (Rom.11:2). Foreknew here is more than the essence of knowing beforehand, but really of election (Rom.8:29). Now Paul said concerning the people of Israel, there is a remnant according to the election of grace, while the rest were hardened. Concerning the hardening, in Rom.11:8 Paul tells us about this hardening:

“God has given them a spirit of stupor,
Eyes that they should not see
And ears that they should not hear,
To this very day.”

To this very day indicates that such was the case even long long before the time of Paul, and that this continues in Paul’s day, even until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in (Rom.11:25). Also, this have us understand then that this dealing of God with the people of Israel is not individually, but with the people of Israel as a whole, as a nation. So that, we must be reading this in that perspective and not take it as though it is on the individual level, for that would be a mistake.

So, when we read Paul’s rhetorical question in Rom.11:11, “have they stumbled that they should fall?”, that is not on the individual, but of Israel as a whole.

The presence of a remnant of Israel, shows that God has not cast off His chosen people of Israel completely, or been unfaithful to His promises to them. Paul speaks even of past generations as also having a remnant by the election of grace. What became of those of the rest of those past generations of Israel is obvious. They have not attained salvation as did the chosen remnant. The matter is that, why are they referred to as remnants? In my view, they are and are then representative of the Israel of God, them He foreknew. Now, who are these remnants of Israel? Paul in Rom. 9 tells us this concerning Israel:

“they are not all Israel who are of Israel”

“those who are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God; but the children of the promise are counted as the seed”

Now Paul tells us who are the children of promise in Gal. 3:28

“Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are children of promise.”

Tong
R2002