Is Sinning on Purpose Willful Sin ?

[Brother Mike]

My understanding....
Yes, to them belongs the adoption of sons. But how so? Because of the fathers.

Rom 9:6 And it is not possible that the word of God hath failed; for not all who are of Israel are these Israel;
Rom 9:7 nor because they are seed of Abraham are all children, but--`in Isaac shall a seed be called to thee;'
Rom 9:8 that is, the children of the flesh--these are not children of God; but the children of the promise are reckoned for seed;

Rom 9:12 `The greater shall serve the less;'
Rom 9:13 according as it hath been written, `Jacob I did love, and Esau I did hate.'

Jacob, being the covenant of grace and faith/the seed. Esau, the covenant of works/the flesh.
We see the same as being Sarah and Hagar.
The promise to Abraham and his ONE Seed and this seed is Jesus the Christ.

So who is Israel, all those from both before the cross and after the cross who are found to be righteous by grace through faith, in the Redeemer.
All these are Israel, the Israel of God. As the scripture says, All Israel shall be saved.

Rom 11:23 kjva And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be graffed in: for God is able to graff them in again.

Yes, all Israel shall be saved............ If.....If.......If... They stop with the unbelief, then they are put back in.

Rom 11:31 kjva Even so have these also now not believed, that through your mercy they also may obtain mercy.

They may also obtain mercy, just like us. Not automatic, but MAY Obtain it.

Gal 4:5 kjva To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons.

The deal is to believe on the son of God, for everyone. We have to receive that, everyone's own choice.

Rom 3:9 kjva What then? are we better than they? No, in no wise: for we have before proved both Jews and Gentiles, that they are all under sin;

All under sin, all in the same boat, no free rides to ignore Jesus.

 

[rthom7]

Rom 6:16 kjv Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness?

Despite what Adam may have known or not known. Adam did make a choice to serve Satan, not God by a willful act against what God said. God said the day you eat. The day you die. Adam chose that.

1Ti 2:14 kjva And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.

Adam knew fully well what he was doing, and what the consequences of his actions were going to be.

Wilful sinning is about learning to say no and asking God for power to overcome...unless of course we love our pet sins...

Heb 10:26 For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins,

Shalom

 

[Brother Mike]

Wilful sinning is about learning to say no and asking God for power to overcome...unless of course we love our pet sins...

Heb 10:26 For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins,

Shalom

If Hebrews 10 stopped at verse 26. Sounds good. However, the willfully sin in Hebrews 10:26 is none recoverable. It's one specific sin, that those commuting it, will not even considering coming back.

Have to love spell checker and tablets.

 

[FreeGrace]

How ridiculous. You're saying that an unbeliever is still a child of God.

Please prove that a child of God UNbecomes a child of God. It is your view that is ridiculous. You can't change your birth parents any more than you can change God as your Heavenly Father.

You're plainly saying unbelievers will pass through the coming Judgment safely, yet you agreed that the suggestion is ludicrous.

I'm plainly saying that a child of God is ALWAYS a child of God. Which you haven't proven otherwise.

Are you going to explain how Israel can have the gift of adoption of sons, yet are condemned and not saved because of their unbelief? You have to explain it because it goes completely contrary to your assertion that 'once a son, always a son'.

The adoption of sons refers ONLY to believers, not the nation Israel.

I've PROVEN OSAS by Rom 11:29, and provided the evidence that God's gift and calling refer only to believers. It is your view that has no support. Only assumptions.

 

[FreeGrace]

Good, maybe we'll get somewhere now.

The promise of what is to come is how Paul can say that Israel's gifting and calling to be sons of God--a gift they have not received--is irrevocable.

No he didn't. I've shown the context for 11:29. Which is 1:5-7, 5:15,17, 6:23, 8:28,30. The gift and calling is only for believers.

It's a proof text that shows God will fulfill his promise--not to people who reject him but are saved nevertheless--

The nation of Israel is not all saved, so your conclusion is still wrong.

but to some Israelites somewhere who will not reject him.

I'm amazed at your denial of what is so clear. The gift is righteousness, per Rom 5:17 or eternal life, per 6:23 and the calling is ONLY for those who have believed, per 1:5-7, 8:28,30.

It's hardly a proof text that says salvation can not be taken back.

Since God's gift is eternal life and believers are referred to as the called, and they are irrevocable, yeah, I'd say that pretty much clarifies that salvation cannot be taken back.

I am still amazed that you believe that, given there are NO verses that say that.

The passage is about the calling and gifting of Israel as a nation not being revoked.

Israel as a nation has NEVER been referred to as "the called" or a gift. You are off base.

 

[FreeGrace]

I know what prayer is and to whom., I did all that, basically if what you said is true then fully who is it that I went back to something I choose to do? God does change me but if you according to you its all at once then my nature to do that is gone.

Nope. I've never said that. Experiential sanctification is a life long process. The only thing that is all at once is the new birth. And the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. Christian growth is life long.

yet when I repented, I know and I didn't care to do that.

Huh? You repented but "didn't care to do that". Huh?

so which prayer was real? both or the first only or the second?

As I clearly said, prayer isn't the issue. Believing is the issue. What exactly did you believe?

free will? many osasers are against limited free will or the doctrine of calvin and yet teach that if I choose sin and don't want to go heaven, somehow god will force me to go.

When a believer dies, their soul is freed from their corrupted and sinful body and nature. At that point, you'll not want to go to hell. How ridiculous to think anyone after the soul leaves the body would think that.

 

[FreeGrace]

*[[Rom 5:17]] kjva* For if by one man's offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.)

Rom 8:28 kjva And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose.

Joh 5:22-24 kjva 22 For the Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgment unto the Son: 23 That all men should honour the Son, even as they honour the Father. He that honoureth not the Son honoureth not the Father which hath sent him. 24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.

Rom 5:18 kjva Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life.

The only source of truth is scripture. Jesus forordainded before the foundation of the world (for known before hand) was all things made for, and because of the son. There is nothing made not under him, and he died for all effected by one man's sin, that the father saved all men through his son that many who believed should be justified by free grace through faith in the word and Faith created by the word preached.

Predestination is a bad doctrine and I wish it was not added to OSAS. For by grace came to all, not by our own works. The grace is there, free with nothing under man's own efforts that can change it. Adams sin effected every single man, and grace to everyone that will believe.

Who can believe and be saved? As it is written even Israel who have promise through election of God's own oath can only be grafted in again if they believe. How much more those who are not elected in through the oath?

Rom 11:18-24 kjva 18 Boast not against the branches. But if thou boast, thou bearest not the root, but the root thee. 19 Thou wilt say then, The branches were broken off, that I might be graffed in. 20 Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear: 21 For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee. 22 Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God: on them which fell, severity; but toward thee, goodness, if thou continue in his goodness: otherwise thou also shalt be cut off. 23 And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be graffed in: for God is able to graff them in again. 24 For if thou wert cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and wert graffed contrary to nature into a good olive tree: how much more shall these, which be the natural branches, be graffed into their own olive tree?

The promise is to all men. God has not made one person without a good plan for them. Many are called, few are chosen.

Amen!

 

[FreeGrace]

There are lots of places in scripture where man messes up God's soverighen plan.

Really? So God isn't all that omniscient? How can anyone "sneek up" on God's plan? He has always known everything that will occur. No one is able to "mess up" God's plan. That suggests that God is neither sovereign nor omniscient nor omnipotent. Because He is all that, His plan cannot be "messed up".

Lots of places where God changes his mind.

Those are just anthropathisms to communicate that God changes His policy according to how people respond or react to His promises. But He's always known exactly how everyone will act and think.

 

[FreeGrace]

Hebrews has plenty of verses that imply that some Christians have to maintain their faith, otherwise IMO they are lost. One is Hebrews 6:1-8.

The problem is that cannot come to repentance doesn't mean "get saved again", as some apparently think. The author was describing believers who had returned to the Mosaic law, and animal sacrifices, which are of no good to anyone. Christ died for all sin. He is the perfect sacrifice. Animal sacrifice is no longer required as Christ replaced animal sacrifice by His own sacrifice, once for all. I don't agree that there are any verses that "imply that some Christians has to maintain their faith". Also, the Bible is clear that ALL believers are supposed to continue in the faith.

If as you say that no one can disown Jesus, the words "have fallen away" would not have been there. I would suggest that you read Hebrews and pay attention to the little word "if".

I pay attention to all the words. Especially the conditional clauses. ;)

 

[FreeGrace]

Can you see that it is impossible to make this particular passage, Romans 11:28-29 NASB mean that once you are saved you can never be unsaved?

No, Paul covered OSAS in 11:29, after already citing who are the called in 1:5-7, 8:28,30 and what the gift is in 5:15, 17 and 6:23.

He's saying because of God's promise to the Patriarchs it is impossible for God to revoke his gifts and calling to Abraham's descendants.

He never said any such thing. Quit bringing Israel into this, since Paul already defined who are the called and what the gift is previously in his epistle. National Israel is NEVER described as the called, and is NEVER said to have been gifts. Blessings, yes, gifts, no.

 

[Chopper]

The problem is that cannot come to repentance doesn't mean "get saved again", as some apparently think. The author was describing believers who had returned to the Mosaic law, and animal sacrifices, which are of no good to anyone. Christ died for all sin. He is the perfect sacrifice. Animal sacrifice is no longer required as Christ replaced animal sacrifice by His own sacrifice, once for all. I don't agree that there are any verses that "imply that some Christians has to maintain their faith". Also, the Bible is clear that ALL believers are supposed to continue in the faith.


I pay attention to all the words. Especially the conditional clauses. ;)

We disagree.

 

[WIP]

You'd have made it to heaven. Once a son, always a son. The prodigal son left The Fathers house to live it up, realized he wasn't where he belonged and came home. So did you.

The difficulty I'm seeing with your prodigal son reference is the scripture says he was lost until he returned.

22 “But the father said to his servants, ‘Bring out the best robe and put it on him, and put a ring on his hand and sandals on his feet.
23 And bring the fatted calf here and kill it, and let us eat and be merry;
24 for this my son was dead and is alive again; he was lost and is found.’

 

[Brother Mike]

Really? So God isn't all that omniscient? How can anyone "sneek up" on God's plan? He has always known everything that will occur. No one is able to "mess up" God's plan. That suggests that God is neither sovereign nor omniscient nor omnipotent. Because He is all that, His plan cannot be "messed up".


Those are just anthropathisms to communicate that God changes His policy according to how people respond or react to His promises. But He's always known exactly how everyone will act and think.

To say God knows every thing that will occur. Is to also say God is a liar. You have zero scripture to prove that God says one thing knowing fully ahead of time that it will end up differently.

The problem is this religious nonsense that has been feed to all of us. God tells us exactly how he operates and what he knows and does not know. To not understand those things hinders us from knowing God and receiving from him.

Jesus said, dung around the tree, if it does not produce fruit, then cast it into the fire.
He did not say I know the future, don't wast your time or mine dunging the tree.

God said I am giving you the promise land that flows with milk and honey. God did not say, I would have given you the promise land, but I already know ahead of time you backsiders are going to screw it up, so I breach my promise now before I even make it to you.

God said Eli I'm am giving you and your family the priesthood. God did not say, your faithful now Eli, and I would have given you the priesthood but already know you won't put your sons in subjection so I won't Lie to you making you think I am actually going to give you the priesthood.

God saying to Abraham, now I know you will not withhold anything from me. Now I know... God did not say, why waste your time Abraham dragging Isaac up here and freaking the boy out. I am God and I just lied to you about having to sacrifice him because I already knew you would do it. I don't have to try the reigns of hearts or seek someone's heart that is perfect towards me, I lied about all that, I knew who those hearts would be before the foundation of the world.

Free grace, I would strongly suggest you study these things out a bit better. God is no liar, does not say one thing, knowing something else (deception) and is no respecter of persons. God only knows the heart of man and has afforded man the opportunity to change his heart.

Know the difference between God's eternal word that will come to pass as God has spoken, and God's plan for each man. One is conditional, the other is not. Peter said that.

 

[FreeGrace]

To say God knows every thing that will occur. Is to also say God is a liar. You have zero scripture to prove that God says one thing knowing fully ahead of time that it will end up differently.

I find these 2 sentences puzzling, to say the least. I know what the word "omniscience" means, but maybe you have a different definition of it. But God does know everything. So to say that God knows everything is NOT to say that He is a liar. That's just a bizarre statement. Your second sentence makes no sense to me. Where does God "say one thing knowing fully ahead of time that it will end up differently"? Why would anyone even make that claim? I sure haven't.

The problem is this religious nonsense that has been feed to all of us. God tells us exactly how he operates and what he knows and does not know.

OK, please provide the Scripture that tells us what God does not know. I can't wait.

God said I am giving you the promise land that flows with milk and honey. God did not say, I would have given you the promise land, but I already know ahead of time you backsiders are going to screw it up, so I breach my promise now before I even make it to you.

Your error is that He DID give it to the Jews. Just not the first generation, who did screw up, as you noted. In fact, they hid behind their children as their "reason" (excuse) for not entering the promised land (Num 14:1-4) after the 12 spies came back and reported what they found. And God responded by saying that for such a lack of faith, He would give the land to their children, but they themselves would NOT enter. Num 14:22-23

God said Eli I'm am giving you and your family the priesthood. God did not say, your faithful now Eli, and I would have given you the priesthood but already know you won't put your sons in subjection so I won't Lie to you making you think I am actually going to give you the priesthood.

God did give Eli the priesthood. In fact, even his sons were priests. Maybe reading Scripture would help you understand the truth.

Free grace, I would strongly suggest you study these things out a bit better. God is no liar, does not say one thing, knowing something else (deception) and is no respecter of persons. God only knows the heart of man and has afforded man the opportunity to change his heart.

So you deny God's attribute of omniscience. Sad, to say the least.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Please prove that a child of God UNbecomes a child of God. It is your view that is ridiculous. You can't change your birth parents any more than you can change God as your Heavenly Father.

This is absurd logic:
It's physically impossible to reverse the fact that a natural child is born to natural parents, therefore, it's impossible for God to not dwell in a person anymore. How pathetically absurd.

I'm plainly saying that a child of God is ALWAYS a child of God. Which you haven't proven otherwise.

Here we see sanctified believers suffering the judgment of the enemies--not the sons--of God:

"29 How much severer punishment do you think he will deserve who has trampled underfoot the Son of God, and has regarded as unclean the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and has insulted the Spirit of grace? " (Hebrews 10:29 NASB)

Just another one of those passages that doesn't really mean what it so plainly says, right?

The adoption of sons refers ONLY to believers, not the nation Israel.

"3 For I could wish that I myself were accursed, separated from Christ for the sake of my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh, 4 who are Israelites, to whom belongs the adoption as sons..." (Romans 9:3 NASB)

Wait, wait, let me guess.....this verse doesn't really mean what it says, right?

I've PROVEN OSAS by Rom 11:29, and provided the evidence that God's gift and calling refer only to believers. It is your view that has no support. Only assumptions.

"5 ...the LORD spoke to Moses...19 "I (the Lord) have given the Levites as a gift to Aaron and to his sons..." (Numbers 8:5,19 NASB)

Don't forget that you insisted that the 'gifts' in Romans 11:29 NASB could only be talking about all the gifts given to believers, not natural Israel because God did not give any gifts to natural Israel. You did that in order to avoid the obvious context of the passage which is natural Israel. This is the second direct example I've provided of gifts that God gave to Israel (one of which, by the way, is revocable), yet you continue to insist that God never gave any gifts to Israel, therefore, the context of Romans 11:29 NASB has to be talking about the gift of salvation given to believers, therefore, it is that which is irrevocable. That's not honest. Shame, shame.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

No he didn't. I've shown the context for 11:29. Which is 1:5-7, 5:15,17, 6:23, 8:28,30. The gift and calling is only for believers.

Stop playing games and look at the context right in the passage itself that you're not including in your list of so-called context proofs:

"25 For I do not want you, brethren, to be uninformed of this mystery -so that you will not be wise in your own estimation -that a partial hardening has happened to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in; 26 and so all Israel will be saved; just as it is written, "THE DELIVERER WILL COME FROM ZION, HE WILL REMOVE UNGODLINESS FROM JACOB." 27 "THIS IS MY COVENANT WITH THEM, WHEN I TAKE AWAY THEIR SINS." 28 From 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; 29 for the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable. 30 For just as you once were disobedient to God, but now have been shown mercy because of their disobedience" (Romans 11:25-30 NASB capitals in original)

So, go grab a leftover turkey sandwich, put your little OSAS thinking cap on and share your explanation with us how the context is natural Israel from verse 25 to verse 28, then suddenly changes to believers in Christ in verse 29, and then switches back to natural Israel by the end of verse 30. Hold on to your hat, folks!

The nation of Israel is not all saved...

That's the point! The natural nation of Israel--the context of the passage--is not saved, so salvation can not be one of the gifts that he is saying is irrevocable! OSAS has to suddenly change the context of verse 29 away from that of natural Israel before and after verse 29 to make the irrevocable gift being spoken of salvation.

I'm amazed at your denial of what is so clear. The gift is righteousness, per Rom 5:17 or eternal life, per 6:23 and the calling is ONLY for those who have believed, per 1:5-7, 8:28,30.

I predict your explanation I asked for above will show who is in denial and who we should be amazed at.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Israel as a nation has NEVER been referred to as "the called" or a gift. You are off base.

"19 "I have given the Levites as a gift to Aaron and to his sons..." (Numbers 8:19 NASB)

"1 When Israel was a youth I loved him, And out of Egypt I called My son. " (Hosea 11:1 NASB)

 

[FreeGrace]

This is absurd logic:
It's physically impossible to reverse the fact that a natural child is born to natural parents, therefore, it's impossible for God to not dwell in a person anymore. How pathetically absurd.

Well, maybe you're starting to realize my point, which was this: You can't change your birth parents any more than you can change God as your Heavenly Father.

iow, once a child of God, always a child of God. Now, what goes along with becoming a child of God? The gift of eternal life (Rom 6:23) or righteousness (Rom 5:15-17), the indwelling of the Holy Spirit (Gal 3:3,5).

If you cannot provide any verse that says that any of these things: eternal life, righteousness, the indwelling of the Holy Spirit can be experienced by any believer, then you have zero evidence for your view.

Here we see sanctified believers suffering the judgment of the enemies--not the sons--of God:

"29 How much severer punishment do you think he will deserve who has trampled underfoot the Son of God, and has regarded as unclean the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and has insulted the Spirit of grace? " (Hebrews 10:29 NASB)

Just another one of those passages that doesn't really mean what it so plainly says, right?

Actually, it says and means exactly what it says. But why do you ASSUME severer punishment equals the LoF?

"3 For I could wish that I myself were accursed, separated from Christ for the sake of my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh, 4 who are Israelites, to whom belongs the adoption as sons..." (Romans 9:3 NASB)

Wait, wait, let me guess.....this verse doesn't really mean what it says, right?

So please, explain what you think this verse means. I have no idea.

I will tell you this: the Greek word for 'adoption' is:
uihothesia
1) adoption, adoption as sons
1a) that relationship which God was pleased to establish between himself and the Israelites in preference to all other nations
1b) the nature and condition of the true disciples in Christ, who by receiving the Spirit of God into their souls become sons of God
1c) the blessed state looked for in the future life after the visible return of Christ from heaven

It's clear that meanings 1b and 1c do not apply here, as Paul is referring to the nation of Israel, who rejected the Messiah.

And this adoption is NEVER referred to as a gift, so does NOT apply to 11:29. Neither as a calling. God never called Israel. He just chose them. The difference is huge.

"5 ...the LORD spoke to Moses...19 "I (the Lord) have given the Levites as a gift to Aaron and to his sons..." (Numbers 8:5,19 NASB)

Don't forget that you insisted that the 'gifts' in Romans 11:29 NASB could only be talking about all the gifts given to believers, not natural Israel because God did not give any gifts to natural Israel.

Why in the world would anyone think 11:29 was referring to the gift of the Levites to Aaron was in Paul's mind? All you've done is find ANY verse that mentions a "gift" in relation to Israel. This in no way supports your view, but does show the desperation in trying to find ANY verse to use in support of your view.

Paul had already noted who he viewed as the "called" in 1:5-7 and 8:28,30. And he clearly noted what God's gift was in 5:15,17 and 6:23. So by the time the Romans read up to 11:29, they would obviously know what Paul had in mind.

Your refusal to accept the clear meaning of 11:29 is no different than the Calvinist's claim that Heb 2:9 doesn't really mean everyone in the world, but only those noted in v.10; the "many sons". Your argument is just as weak as theirs regarding the scope of the atonement. Calvinists deny that Jesus died for everyone, yet that is exactly what Heb 2:9 SAYS and MEANS.

You, just like the Calvinists, deny that salvation is irrevocable, yet that is exactly what Rom 11:29 MEANS.

You did that in order to avoid the obvious context of the passage which is natural Israel. This is the second direct example I've provided of gifts that God gave to Israel (one of which, by the way, is revocable), yet you continue to insist that God never gave any gifts to Israel, therefore, the context of Romans 11:29 NASB has to be talking about the gift of salvation given to believers, therefore, it is that which is irrevocable. That's not honest. Shame, shame.

All shame is on you and the Calvinists, who, when confronted with Scripture which DIRECTLY refutes their view, just twists the verse all out of shape.

 

[FreeGrace]

Stop playing games and look at the context right in the passage itself that you're not including in your list of so-called context proofs:

"25 For I do not want you, brethren, to be uninformed of this mystery -so that you will not be wise in your own estimation -that a partial hardening has happened to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in; 26 and so all Israel will be saved; just as it is written, "THE DELIVERER WILL COME FROM ZION, HE WILL REMOVE UNGODLINESS FROM JACOB." 27 "THIS IS MY COVENANT WITH THEM, WHEN I TAKE AWAY THEIR SINS." 28 From 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; 29 for the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable. 30 For just as you once were disobedient to God, but now have been shown mercy because of their disobedience" (Romans 11:25-30 NASB capitals in original)

So, go grab a leftover turkey sandwich, put your little OSAS thinking cap on and share your explanation with us how the context is natural Israel from verse 25 to verse 28, then suddenly changes to believers in Christ in verse 29, and then switches back to natural Israel by the end of verse 30. Hold on to your hat, folks!

That's the point! The natural nation of Israel--the context of the passage--is not saved, so salvation can not be one of the gifts that he is saying is irrevocable! OSAS has to suddenly change the context of verse 29 away from that of natural Israel before and after verse 29 to make the irrevocable gift being spoken of salvation.

I predict your explanation I asked for above will show who is in denial and who we should be amazed at.

This entire tirade is refuted by the obvious fact of the subject that is noted in the immediately preceeding verse to 11:29.

"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. NASB

There you have it. Paul speaks from the standpoint of the gospel, which is a DIRECT reference to salvation. How do we know? From what he wrote in 1:16 - "For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek." NASB

So, you have been refuted once again! He opened his epistle by identifying his audience as "called", defines the gospel as the power of God FOR salvation to everyone who believes, and then identifies what God's gift is TO believers; eternal life.

And you want 11:29 to only refer to some gifts to the Jews. Quite sad.

 

[FreeGrace]

"19 "I have given the Levites as a gift to Aaron and to his sons..." (Numbers 8:19 NASB)

"1 When Israel was a youth I loved him, And out of Egypt I called My son. " (Hosea 11:1 NASB)

"...all liars, their part will be in the lake that burns with fire and brimstone..." (Revelation 21: NASB)

OK, 3 verses. So what? None support your claim.

Num 8:19 is about giving the Levites as a gift. This has NOTHING to do with all that Paul wrote in Romans.

Hosea is the obvious reference that God led the Jews out of Egypt. He called them and they responded. btw, since you want to believe that this calling the Jews out of Egypt is what Paul was referring to in Rom 11:29, it isn't even relevant to suggest that this calling could be revocable. It is history. Why would Paul suggest that anything that has already occurred in history might be revocable? That makes no sense. Of course everything that has already occurred cannot be revoked.

So obviously Hos 11:1 cannot be in view regarding 11:29.

I have no idea why you included Rev 21 in your 3 supposed proof texts. Maybe you'll explain. I will hold on to my hat for that.

You have so far still failed to provide anything solid in your defense that Rom 11:29 refers only to the nation of Israel. The context of the entire letter demonstrates that Paul had eternal salvation in mind in 11:29 and stated plainly that eternal salvation cannot be revoked. But since that is in direct conflict with your opinion, you've struggled hard to twist that verse into something totally irrelevant and meaningless.