Impossible! I'm Of The Body Of Christ.

The problem is-predestination in this form leads to 'elitism' which Christ fought against the Jews about. So would Christ make himself a hypocrite and create an 'elite race'? God forbid! We would lose all humility-another cause of Christ.

The 'elitism' argument was exactly why I rejected Calvinism the first time I was exposed to it. But after fully fleshing out the whole of the doctrine of Calvinism with the help of several Reformed Chaplains over a period of about 3 years, I finally realized that I was the elitist back when I pridefully thought I was smart enough to chose God. After all, I was smarter than all the other ignorant unbelievers that just "didn't get it." When I finally realized that it was God who rescued me from my depravity, and it had absolutely nothing to do with my will, that He called me out of my desperately wicked nature (Jer 17:9), regenerated me so that I could recognize my sin and repent, it brought me to my knees with the realization that I owe EVERYTHING to God for giving me the faith that I have. This is where I learned true humility.

I am certain that all believers will someday realize this truth when they stand before God the first time. There will be nobody able to ever say something absurd like, "Thank you Jesus for paying for my sins and all, but I did my part too, you know. I chose you, remember?"
 
I literally laughed out loud when I was first exposed to the Doctrines of Grace. I though it was just plain crazy. Yet, several years later, I'm a very convinced and convicted Calvinist. I think everyone is born an Arminian. We like to think that we have something to do with our eternal salvation. We like to think that we are in control of such things. We don't want to believe that salvation is all of God. We also live in an Arminian culture that oozes the basics of that philosophy. It takes the sovereign work of the Holy Spirit to turn us dyed-in-the-wool born and bred Arminians into Bible believers in the doctrines of sovereign grace.
 
I think everyone is born an Arminian. We like to think that we have something to do with our eternal salvation. We like to think that we are in control of such things. We don't want to believe that salvation is all of God. We also live in an Arminian culture that oozes the basics of that philosophy. It takes the sovereign work of the Holy Spirit to turn us dyed-in-the-wool born and bred Arminians into Bible believers in the doctrines of sovereign grace.

Indeed, sir! I believe the whole "free will" thing stems from our western culture where everything must be fair. Indeed, life is not fair, and shame on us for trying to put God in a box that conforms to our feeble understanding of what is fair and just.

The oddest thing is that most Arminians act like Calvinists but they don't even know it. When Billy goes to the alter for conversion, all the Arminians will say "Praise God" or "Thank you, Jesus!" I always want to ask them, "Why thank Jesus? Billy is the one who made the decision, right?"

Calvinism = God saves you. Arminianism = you save yourself.
 
Sorry sir: this is pure bunk. Show me ONE source that actually says this.

Then show me where non-Western converts do not do exactly the same thing.

Billy actually chose and moved; therefore he was not inactive or passive. He made the decision, as you admit. That is Arminian.

If no one is morally responsible for the rejection of Christ, than the Judgment is a kangaroo court and a farce.

Your whole argument is based upon the presupposition that Billy has the ability to decide for himself. Consider Acts 13:48. Paul said we were "dead" in treaspasses and sin (Eph. 2:1). The word "dead" in the passage is NEKROS, a Greek word meaning "unresponsive." It is used only of corpses; a body totally unresponsive to any stimulus. Jesus said we can not hear the gospel (Jn. 8:43, 47). Paul also said we were blind to the gospel (2 Cor. 4:3-4). Billy was dead, blind, and deaf to the gospel message, until the word of the Holy Spirit. He was just like Lydia in Acts 14. There it says that she heard the word of Paul and once the Lord "opened" her heart, she believed. Interestingly, in that verse, the word for open OGAW is preceded by the preposition DIA meaning He opened her heart's door "fully." I use to be a committed Arminian and I scoffed at Calvinism thinking it was the dumbest thing I've ever heard. 45 years later I've come to see it is exactly what God's Word teaches.
 
Indeed, sir! I believe the whole "free will" thing stems from our western culture where everything must be fair. Indeed, life is not fair, and shame on us for trying to put God in a box that conforms to our feeble understanding of what is fair and just.
You really believe there is no free will? You believe God is good? How do you judge Him as good if He sends people to hell with no free will to choose it? All 5pt Calvinists need to grasp that God is impartial to the maximum like Peter did in Acts 10:34.
Calvinism = God saves you. Arminianism = you save yourself.
Scripture = mutual. As for Arminianism, they assert that:
  1. election (and condemnation on the day of judgment) was conditioned by the rational faith or nonfaith of man;
  2. the atonement, while qualitatively adequate for all men, is efficacious only for the man of faith;
  3. unaided by the Holy Spirit, no person is able to respond to God’s will;
  4. grace is resistible; and
  5. believers are able to resist sin but are not beyond the possibility of falling from grace.
 
Last edited:
You really believe there is no free will? You believe God is good? How do you judge Him as good if He sends people to hell with no free will to choose it? All 5pt Calvinists need to grasp that God is impartial to the maximum like Peter did in Acts 10:34.
Scripture = mutual. As for Arminianism, they assert that:
  1. election (and condemnation on the day of judgment) was conditioned by the rational faith or nonfaith of man;
  2. the atonement, while qualitatively adequate for all men, is efficacious only for the man of faith;
  3. unaided by the Holy Spirit, no person is able to respond to God’s will;
  4. grace is resistible; and
  5. believers are able to resist sin but are not beyond the possibility of falling from grace.

I do believe there is free will. Our will is linked to our natures. I have a cat who is free to act like his nature. He can scratch his left ear and pur whenever he wills. He is not free to act like a dog and bury a bone or chase a car. We are dead sinners and we have free will to act any way we wish within our nature. It isn't until God acts upon us makes into new creatures that we are free to do anything else. I do believe God is Good! He doesn't "send" people to hell, we were sinners before we were born (Ps. 51:5; 58:3) and already on our way to hell. The immediate context of Acts 10:43 has to do with the Jew/Gentile controversy. Peter is expressing, from his personal experience with Cornelius, that salvation isn't just a Jewish blessing. See the very next verse where he talks about the fact that any nationality is welcomed to God by doing what is right and believing upon Him.
 
I do believe there is free will. Our will is linked to our natures. I have a cat who is free to act like his nature. He can scratch his left ear and pur whenever he wills. He is not free to act like a dog and bury a bone or chase a car. We are dead sinners and we have free will to act any way we wish within our nature. It isn't until God acts upon us makes into new creatures that we are free to do anything else. I do believe God is Good! He doesn't "send" people to hell, we were sinners before we were born (Ps. 51:5; 58:3) and already on our way to hell. The immediate context of Acts 10:43 has to do with the Jew/Gentile controversy. Peter is expressing, from his personal experience with Cornelius, that salvation isn't just a Jewish blessing. See the very next verse where he talks about the fact that any nationality is welcomed to God by doing what is right and believing upon Him.


and yet Paul says we have free will and YOU refuse to accept we do, except to equivocate and say it is NOT enough free will to choose God. As far as context is concerned Jack, you have aptly demonstrated you only use it to justify your position and even then you don't really accurately identify what the real context is.
Again that you actually believe the reality of Psalm 51:5 or 58:3 and that it is NOT hyperbole is why you have no credence in your statements. The Bible teaches until we KNOW the law, we can't sin.
 
Yet, the very verses you mentioned here have David saying he was a sinner when he was conceived and he sinned as soon as he was born. Interesting how you argue against something then quote the verse passages that prove the opposite. Didn't you read what you posted?
 
I do believe there is free will. Our will is linked to our natures. I have a cat who is free to act like his nature. He can scratch his left ear and pur whenever he wills. He is not free to act like a dog and bury a bone or chase a car. We are dead sinners and we have free will to act any way we wish within our nature. It isn't until God acts upon us makes into new creatures that we are free to do anything else. I do believe God is Good! He doesn't "send" people to hell, we were sinners before we were born (Ps. 51:5; 58:3) and already on our way to hell. The immediate context of Acts 10:43 has to do with the Jew/Gentile controversy. Peter is expressing, from his personal experience with Cornelius, that salvation isn't just a Jewish blessing. See the very next verse where he talks about the fact that any nationality is welcomed to God by doing what is right and believing upon Him.

Not bad reasoning. But part of human nature is having capacity / space to accept or reject God. Part of God's nature is reaching out to all of us and even more with 'regeneration' for those who show signs of wanting to accept Him.

As for Acts 10:34. Yes that is the context, but why do you limit it to only being the Jewish / Gentile issue? Peter did not say God is impartial on culture. He said ''God is impartial'', no ifs or buts. How do you debunk James 2 and Rom 2:11? I see that your belief rests entirely on debunking these. But you must please try realize that you are defying the English language and logic. God would NOT instruct us to be impartial in James 2 if He is partial. James 2:9 says partiality is a SIN. So we must not sin but God can? See, you have to accept that God is impartial to the maximum, hence free will to accept or reject has to exist even though He is sovereign.
 
I limit it to the Jew/Gentile controversy because--to me--it seems to be the obvious context. The Jews wrongly thought that God's grace was limited to their race and if a Gentile wanted to become a Christian, the Judaizers required him to first become a Jew. It was a major shock to the Jews when God began to save those Gentile dogs without first becoming Jews. James 2 is speaking of rich people and poor people. The Jews wrongly believed that rich people must be righteous because God had blessed them and they were treated as saints, when many of them weren't. Again, to me I see the context of the passage as pretty obvious. The Romans 2:11 passage is also talking about the Jew/Gentile controversy, look at the previous verse (2:10).

I disagree with your idea that human nature has the capacity to accept or reject God. Jesus said, "No one CAN come to me, unless the Father who sent me draws him...." (Jn. 6:44). The Greek word he used means "without ability." You may know the difference between the English words "can" and "may." One speaks of ability and the other of permission. The translators used the correct word here "can." Also, we are told that man is "dead" in trespasses and sins (Eph. 2:1). The word is NEKROS meaning dead in the sense of corpse--unresponsive. A corpse doesn't show any sings of life no matter how intense the stimuli. We are also deaf to the things of God (Jn. 8:43, 47) and Satan has even blinded us to God's word (2 Cor. 4:3-4). So, how can human nature have the capacity to accept or reject God if it is dead, unresponsive, blind, deaf, and without ability? I often go back to Ezekiel's valley of dead bones. Here is a wonderful picture of salvation. He is told to preach to this valley of dead, dry, parched bones and even he seems a little skepical of the assignment, but he does it. As he is preaching, it is God who brings life to the bones.
 
Yet, the very verses you mentioned here have David saying he was a sinner when he was conceived and he sinned as soon as he was born. Interesting how you argue against something then quote the verse passages that prove the opposite. Didn't you read what you posted?

You quoted them Jack, I explained them. Do YOU not know or remember what YOU post? I suggest you READ my post again.
 
I disagree with your idea that human nature has the capacity to accept or reject God. Jesus said, "No one CAN come to me, unless the Father who sent me draws him...." (Jn. 6:44). The Greek word he used means "without ability." You may know the difference between the English words "can" and "may." One speaks of ability and the other of permission. The translators used the correct word here "can." Also, we are told that man is "dead" in trespasses and sins (Eph. 2:1). The word is NEKROS meaning dead in the sense of corpse--unresponsive. A corpse doesn't show any sings of life no matter how intense the stimuli. We are also deaf to the things of God (Jn. 8:43, 47) and Satan has even blinded us to God's word (2 Cor. 4:3-4). So, how can human nature have the capacity to accept or reject God if it is dead, unresponsive, blind, deaf, and without ability? I often go back to Ezekiel's valley of dead bones. Here is a wonderful picture of salvation. He is told to preach to this valley of dead, dry, parched bones and even he seems a little skepical of the assignment, but he does it. As he is preaching, it is God who brings life to the bones.


It is very apparent you don't really read anything anyone posts Jack. You continue to spout your doctrine even though you have been time and again refuted. That you don't understand that we choose even to allow God to draw us, shows your total lack of understanding even the most basic scripture. You obviously understand NEKROS relates to the body and our life force, how we are animated, but you insist on using it to relate to a spiritual condition which is NOT what the Bible teaches. Jesus is our salvation, and as scripture clearly shows, WE choose to accept Him or reject Him.
It's funny how the most ardent of those who have submitted to Calvin's doctrine, always say they used to be on the other side for years and want us to believe they were never actually saved until they discovered Calvinism was true. Obviously if they weren't saved prior to discovering Calvinism, then they were saved and couldn't possible UNDERSTAND what the scriptures taught. Coming to Christ through FALSE teaching only serves to show there is still a lack of salvation on their part, because they have NOT done what the scripture shows is the way to salvation.

Regrettably I cannot continue to debate with someone who looks at EVERY verses through the lens of Calvinism.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
It is very apparent you don't really read anything anyone posts Jack. You continue to spout your doctrine even though you have been time and again refuted. That you don't understand that we choose even to allow God to draw us, shows your total lack of understanding even the most basic scripture. You obviously understand NEKROS relates to the body and our life force, how we are animated, but you insist on using it to relate to a spiritual condition which is NOT what the Bible teaches. Jesus is our salvation, and as scripture clearly shows, WE choose to accept Him or reject Him.
It's funny how the most ardent of those who have submitted to Calvin's doctrine, always say they used to be on the other side for years and want us to believe they were never actually saved until they discovered Calvinism was true. Obviously if they weren't saved prior to discovering Calvinism, then they were saved and couldn't possible UNDERSTAND what the scriptures taught. Coming to Christ through FALSE teaching only serves to show there is still a lack of salvation on their part, because they have NOT done what the scripture shows is the way to salvation.

Regrettably I cannot continue to debate with someone who h looks at EVERY verses through the lens of Calvinism.


If you feel you must give up, Stan, that's entirely up to you. Always a pleasure talking to you.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Billy actually chose and moved; therefore he was not inactive or passive. He made the decision, as you admit. That is Arminian.
Billy was only able to "choose" because he was moved by the Holy Spirit. Without divine intervention, the unregenerate sinner does not, nor can he, seek God. (Rom 3:11) God knew Billy before the beginning of time. In fact, God wrote every day of Billy's life before he was born. (Ps 139:16) God elected him, and predestined that He would save Billy. Upon God's own sovereign timeline, He set the conditions so that Billy would hear the Gospel and He regenerated Billy so that Billy could respond to it. As a result, Billy could recognize his sin, acknowledge his need for Christ, repent, and receive faith in Christ. It is an irresistible, unavoidable choice. This is real grace - getting what you don't deserve.

If no one is morally responsible for the rejection of Christ, than the Judgment is a kangaroo court and a farce.
Everyone is 100% responsible for their rebellion. I have never claimed otherwise. In fact, rebellion is the default position of the unregenerate man. God chooses who He will save and who He won't. He is sovereign and He does what He wants. (Rom 9:18) In the end, the destruction of the wicked is a show for us, the believers. It will be a demonstration of His power so that we may know the riches of His glory. (Rom 9:22-23)
 
You really believe there is no free will?
We only have freedom to act according to our nature. I know that Jack already spoke about this, but I'll use another analogy: Imagine that walnuts are evil and cherries are good. We are all born walnut trees. We have walnut roots, walnut trunks, walnut leaves, and we only produce walnuts (evil). No matter how hard we try, we can never produce cherries. We cannot - nor do we want to. It is impossible. In our unregenerate walnut state, we are hostile to God and we cannot please Him. (Rom 8:5-8) We cannot and will not ever produce cherries in our walnut state.

But when God calls us to Him and regenerates us, our walnut roots are changed to cherry. In fact, the first cherry we will ever produce is repentance. A walnut tree cannot repent. It is incapable of producing this first cherry neither does it have the desire to do so because it is hostile to God. It's only after God rescues us from our depravity and regenerates us that we can start producing cherries and doing things that please God. Repentance is pleasing to God. Walnut trees cannot produce cherry repentance.

You believe God is good? How do you judge Him as good if He sends people to hell with no free will to choose it?
Of course I believe God is good. God is the measure of what is good. I do not judge God. All people are deserving of hell whether they have free will or not. It's only by Christ's sacrifice that believers do not endure His wrath. God is not obligated to save anyone. The fact that He loves any of us is a miracle. Nobody deserves the love of God. Nobody. I am endlessly fascinated by the fact He has chosen to save anyone.

This is not T-ball. Everyone on the planet does not get a chance to win a trophy. God did not design this world based on western society where everything has to be "fair." Some people are chosen for some things, while others are chosen for others. Everyone has their purpose in life. Some are made for destruction, others are made for glory. (Rom 9:22-23) This is really hard to understand - I completely understand your discomfort with it. Was it "fair" that Pharaoh's heart was hardened? Did God not violate Pharaoh's "free will"? Arminian Theology does not have an adequate answer for this. The scriptures tell us that God specifically put Pharaoh in that very position so that God's power would be demonstrated. (Rom 9:17) Is that "fair" for God to use Pharaoh like that, to violate his "free will" by hardening his heart, and to give him no choice but to resist the demands of Moses to let his people go? Perhaps by human standards this is unfair and unjust. But humans are not the measure of what is just. God is. God is the measure of all things.

Your question is very similar to what the Romans asked of Paul. How can God still find fault in us if we have no ability to resist His will? Read the answer for yourself: (Rom 9:20) The bottom line is that God is sovereign. He does what he wants. He has chosen to save his elect because, for reasons I do not understand, He loves us.
 
Billy is not a robot: He responded to the love of Christ, not pushed by God, IMO.
I agree with you on the first part. Billy is not a robot. Billy acts freely according to the will of his nature. As an unregenerate sinner, Billy's will is hostile to God. After regeneration, Billy's wills to love God and serve Him.

Technically, God does not push, he pulls. In fact, he drags us. And it's a good thing too, because scripture tells us that we cannot nor will turn from our wicked ways. John 6:44 tells us, "No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him." The Greek word used here (helko) means to "drag off." It's used in other places in the NT as well that illustrates this meaning:
Acts 16:19, "But when her owners saw that their hope of gain was gone, they seized Paul and Silas and dragged them into the marketplace before the rulers."
Acts 21:30 "Then all the city was stirred up, and the people ran together. They seized Paul and dragged him out of the temple, and at once the gates were shut."
James 2:6 "But you have dishonored the poor man. Are not the rich ones who oppress you, and the ones who drag you into court."
So God just doesn't entice us to come to Him with a simple invitation to which we choose to respond through our own "free will." Because of our depravity, we would not respond to that on our own accord, the same way that billions of people do not respond to it now. He draws, i.e. drags, us to Him because in our state of unregenerate depravity, we are hostile to God and we need his sovereign grace (and power) to pull us, kicking and screaming, to Him.

Yet you claim the unregenerate man was predestined to be that way....Odd...If all is predestined and determined, there is NO FREE WILL or choosing at all, and all the sinner's doing could be "God's doing"....
I claim that because that's what scripture tells us. As for having "no free will", there is only room in the universe for one person to have true free will. That would be God. If we all had free will, if we were all free agents with complete and unfettered freedom of maneuver in the world, God would be able to guarantee nothing. Man is not sovereign. God is. Have you ever said a prayer for God to affect a particular outcome in your life, perhaps for a promotion or for safety while doing something dangerous? Is it possible for God to make those things happen for you without affecting other people's "free" choices? God is very busy in the world ensuring that all outcomes work out for our own good and ultimately glorify Him in the end.[/quote]

God is not in need of proving or showing off His power to us, IMO. Destroying billions of humans will not make the remainder happy. Especially if your theory that God created them to fry....

Paul disagreed with you. (Rom 9:22-23) God may not need to do it, but He has chosen to do so. It may not make us happy, but it will certainly help us appreciate the awesomeness of God.
 
Last edited:
We only have freedom to act according to our nature. I know that Jack already spoke about this, but I'll use another analogy: Imagine that walnuts are evil and cherries are good. We are all born walnut trees. We have walnut roots, walnut trunks, walnut leaves, and we only produce walnuts (evil). No matter how hard we try, we can never produce cherries. We cannot - nor do we want to. It is impossible. In our unregenerate walnut state, we are hostile to God and we cannot please Him. (Rom 8:5-8) We cannot and will not ever produce cherries in our walnut state.
But when God calls us to Him and regenerates us, our walnut roots are changed to cherry. In fact, the first cherry we will ever produce is repentance. A walnut tree cannot repent. It is incapable of producing this first cherry neither does it have the desire to do so because it is hostile to God. It's only after God rescues us from our depravity and regenerates us that we can start producing cherries and doing things that please God. Repentance is pleasing to God. Walnut trees cannot produce cherry repentance.

I trust you understand that this is called CIRCULAR reasoning. WE are human beings, much more complicated than walnuts or cherries. What WE can do is what fruits and nuts CAN'T do, and that is CHOOSE what we will become. Either a child of God or a child of the devil.
WE, are made in God's image. Tripartite, 3 in 1. Just as Adam and Eve had free will to choose to obey or not obey God, we have the same choice. There is no such thing as total depravity in the Bible Kurt, ONLY in Calvinism. That is established by Jesus in Matthew 7:11. Regeneration is NOT a Biblical fact either. Besides, IF Calvinists believe that man is a DEgenerate, then why would God REgenerate us? When were we ever generate? You can't accept the truth that God commands us to repent and then believe we have no power to do so. You can't believe Rom 10:9-10 and then say we don't have the power to do so. That would be oxymoronic, and God is NOT oxymoronic.

Of course I believe God is good. God is the measure of what is good. I do not judge God. All people are deserving of hell whether they have free will or not. It's only by Christ's sacrifice that believers do not endure His wrath. God is not obligated to save anyone. The fact that He loves any of us is a miracle. Nobody deserves the love of God. Nobody. I am endlessly fascinated by the fact He has chosen to save anyone.

That can't be true Kurt if God took Elijah and Enoch to paradise and did NOT kill them can it? The one who sins must die so obviously Elijah and Enoch did NOT sin did they?

This is not T-ball. Everyone on the planet does not get a chance to win a trophy. God did not design this world based on western society where everything has to be "fair." Some people are chosen for some things, while others are chosen for others. Everyone has their purpose in life. Some are made for destruction, others are made for glory. (Rom 9:22-23) This is really hard to understand - I completely understand your discomfort with it. Was it "fair" that Pharaoh's heart was hardened? Did God not violate Pharaoh's "free will"? Arminian Theology does not have an adequate answer for this. The scriptures tell us that God specifically put Pharaoh in that very position so that God's power would be demonstrated. (Rom 9:17) Is that "fair" for God to use Pharaoh like that, to violate his "free will" by hardening his heart, and to give him no choice but to resist the demands of Moses to let his people go? Perhaps by human standards this is unfair and unjust. But humans are not the measure of what is just. God is. God is the measure of all things.

What did Paul say in 2 Tim 4:8, or in Phil 3:14? Sounds like a trophy to me. In Rom 9:22-23, Paul is asking a question, he says WHAT IF? What Paul is trying to teach is that God does NOT make BAD people but He KNOWS what people will be bad. Everything God has done and will do is part of His plan from BEFORE creation. Contingencies, or what Calvinists like to call "predestination" are based on His FOREKNOWLEDGE. Carefully read Acts 2:23, Rom 8:29, 11:2 and 1 Peter 1:2.
The Bible has ALL the answers you need, NOT any doctrine. Doctrines are flawed Kurt. The Bible isn't.
I agree that humans cannot measure who and what is the mystery of God, and yet YOU try. You decide how God has done things and try to tie it up in a neat little box called Calvinism. Arminians tried the same thing. That is NOT how to know and understand God. THAT, can ONLY be found in His Holy Word.

Your question is very similar to what the Romans asked of Paul. How can God still find fault in us if we have no ability to resist His will? Read the answer for yourself: (Rom 9:20) The bottom line is that God is sovereign. He does what he wants. He has chosen to save his elect because, for reasons I do not understand, He loves us.

Rom 9:20 is Paul teaching about Israel and how even though chosen they could NOT follow God and His plan and rebelled. It is NOT because God chose them or chooses us that we become children of God and joint heirs with Jesus, it is because WE choose to submit our will to Him and voluntarily love Him and OBEY Him. It's a simple matter of OUR choice and God's grace. He loves us because He chooses to, and because we are made in His image we are able to choose as well. God had angels to do His bidding, He did NOT create us as another set of angels to be controlled, He chose to create us to have children that LOVE and SERVE Him of our own free will.
Jer 29:12-14 and Matthew 7:7 are very clear.
 
Look at Romans 9:22 again...God's power is His patience, not His brute strength. God's awesomeness is His endurance with sinful man...He's not "itching to wipe the majority of humanity" out to prove to anyone who He is....Jesus is who He is, not Thor or Zeus or Charleton Heston.

We have already been over the theory of the word "drag" in Greek, so I won't repeat it here. Please use the search engine with the forum.

I say God wants volunteers, not drug in people. I see conversion as a co-operation, not a use of any type of force...and as your other verses showed, to be dragged around is force.

If God pre-chose before any man was born whom He would drag to Himself, He also chose to not bother dragging the vast majority of equally sinful humanity....So this claim makes Him a respector of persons in utter contradiction to numerous verses otherwise:

Each one of the five passages you listed where it says God is "no respecter of persons" has a specific context to it. In Acts 10:34 Peter is presenting the gospel to a group of Gentiles for the first time. Prior to this, even he was hesitant about the evangelism of Gentiles, but God makes no difference between Jews and Gentiles. Even in verse 35 he makes the statement, "but in every nation," (not just Israel). In Ro. 2:11 it is the same context as the previous verse indicates. "Glory and honor and peace to every man who does good, to the Jews first and also to the Greek" (2:10). In Eph. 6:9 Paul is talking to slaves and reminds them that when it comes to the status of master or slave, God is not partial when it comes to salvation. He saves both. He told the church in Colosse (3:25) that rewards and punishments that God gives are given without any partiality, which they are. A person's station in life makes no difference. Peter has the same idea (1:17) when he wrote that God "judges according to each man's work" regardless of their station in life.

I think you're trying to get the Scripture to say something it doesn't say by not paying attention to the contexts of the passages.
 
Back
Top