Faith

[prism]

I appreciate your candidness about the metaphors, acknowledging that they may have introduced some confusion. Let's set aside the theatrical elements and delve into the heart of the matter. In the context of Romans 9:20-21, how do you interpret Paul's analogy of the potter and clay, and what implications do you draw from it within the Calvinistic framework? Let's engage in a thoughtful exploration of the theological landscape without the frills.

My take is perhaps similar to yours.
In context Paul is dealing with the issue of why not all the Israelites are coming to faith in their Messiah. In verse 6 Paul explains 'They are not all Israel which is of Israel', meaning God has His elect (remnant) from the Israelites. There are some believing Israelites and some who are of natural Israel but are not believers.
It's the children who believe the promise (v.8), that are counted for the seed, not those of works (v.11). that election may stand. Isaac and Jacob were of the promise (not all the descendants of Abraham i.e the elect according to promise)
God has given His Promised Son, and promises Life to those who believe.


As far as vss. 20/21 go

Romans 9:20-21 KJV
Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus? [21] Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?

I won't try interjecting free will here because the only ones that had free will were Adam and Eve, and we see where that got them,, also I don't hold to free will. (Man is a slave to sin, satan, his flesh etc.). Otherwise God is God and turns hearts in whatever direction He wishes.

I'm just not sure how God judges as guilty, those whom He has 'formed' so, do you?

 

[Tulipbee]

My take is perhaps similar to yours.
In context Paul is dealing with the issue of why not all the Israelites are coming to faith in their Messiah. In verse 6 Paul explains 'They are not all Israel which is of Israel', meaning God has His elect (remnant) from the Israelites. There are some believing Israelites and some who are of natural Israel but are not believers.
It's the children who believe the promise (v.8), that are counted for the seed, not those of works (v.11). that election may stand. Isaac and Jacob were of the promise (not all the descendants of Abraham i.e the elect according to promise)
God has given His Promised Son, and promises Life to those who believe.


As far as vss. 20/21 go

Romans 9:20-21 KJV
Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus? [21] Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?

I won't try interjecting free will here because the only ones that had free will were Adam and Eve, and we see where that got them,, also I don't hold to free will. (Man is a slave to sin, satan, his flesh etc.). Otherwise God is God and turns hearts in whatever direction He wishes.

I'm just not sure how God judges as guilty, those whom He has 'formed' so, do you?

Hello prism,
I appreciate your thoughtful response and your interpretation of Romans 9:20-21 within the Calvinistic framework. Let's delve into some of the key points:

1. Elect Remnant from Israel:
   • Your understanding aligns with the Calvinistic perspective that not all Israelites are part of the elect. The emphasis on the remnant chosen by God based on His promise to believers resonates with the Calvinistic concept of unconditional election.
2. Children of the Promise:
   • Your interpretation of the children who believe the promise being counted as the true seed, as opposed to those relying on works, reflects the Calvinistic emphasis on God's sovereign choice rather than human merit.
3. Potter and Clay Analogy:
   • In exploring the potter and clay analogy, you rightly refrain from interjecting free will, recognizing the overarching sovereignty of God in molding vessels for honor or dishonor. This aligns with the Calvinistic understanding of God's absolute control over the destinies of individuals.
4. God's Judgment:
   • Your question about how God judges as guilty those whom He has formed raises a significant theological point. Within the Calvinistic framework, God's judgment is seen as part of His sovereign will, and the fallen nature of humanity is acknowledged as a result of the Fall.

In addressing Arminianism, it's crucial to consider the tension between God's sovereignty and human responsibility, a perspective that Calvinism seeks to navigate with a strong emphasis on God's predestining grace.
Let's continue this thoughtful exploration, keeping in mind the richness and complexity of these theological concepts.

 

[Tulipbee]

Who cares about the 'Calvinistic framework'?

We should only care about what Scripture says.

Of course, without the 'frills' and 'comedy' is the sober way to address the subject.

Lees

Hello Lees,

I appreciate your emphasis on focusing solely on what Scripture says, and I agree that a sober and straightforward examination of biblical passages is crucial. Let's indeed turn our attention to Romans 9:20-21 without unnecessary embellishments.

In the context of Romans 9:20-21, how do you interpret Paul's analogy of the potter and clay? What implications do you draw from it within your understanding of biblical doctrine? Let's engage in a thoughtful exploration, anchored in the Scriptures, as we seek to grasp the profound truths conveyed in this passage.

 

[brightfame52]

Believers first believed in Christ !2


Now heres the good news if Christ was our Head when He came into the world to live and die for our sins !

Just as Christ in our behalf obeyed God, in His Obedience Rom 5:19

For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.

Listen, just as adams disobedience was an headship disobedience, so likewise Christ's Obedience here was an Headship obedience ! And its an obedience of Faith/ Trust in God, this we know by this scripture Heb 2:13

13 And again, I will put my trust in him. And again, Behold I and the children which God hath given me.

The speaker here is the Lord Jesus Christ stating that He will put His Trust in God, and to show that it is a Headship Trust, the promise follows, that not only Himself shall put His Trust in God, but so will the children which God has given Him, which is His Seed.

The word Trust is the greek word peithō which is to :

A.to persuade, i.e. to induce one by words to believe

The word Faith comes from this word, heres proof, the word Faith as in Eph 2:8 is the greek word pistis and means:

I.conviction of the truth of anything, belief; in the NT of a conviction or belief respecting man's relationship to God and divine things, generally with the included idea of trust and holy fervour born of faith and joined with it

In fact the word pistis is from the word peithō !

The same word used in Heb 2:13 Trust ! It also means to obey Gal 3:1

O foolish Galatians, who hath bewitched you, that ye should G3982 not obey G3982 the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ hath been evidently set forth, crucified among you?

So Jesus is saying that #1 He shall have Faith in God, obey God, Trust God, be persuaded in God, and #2 so will all His Seed given Him !

Its the same principle as when adam disobeyed and all his seed in him !

So the words of Jesus makes more sense when He says to unbelieving jews, Ye believe not because you are not of my Sheep Jn 10:26, which denotes, if they would have been of His Sheep, they would believe because, He as their Head has already believed for them !

John 5:24 is to the same purpose Jn 5:24

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.

Now who are they which are believing, Trusting in Him who sent Christ ? Its all of them that He was believing God in behalf of, Heb 2:13 !

Its not possible for anyone Christ came and died for not to believe as it was not possible for anyone adam sinned and disobeyed for not to be born as unbelievers, because they already sinned and or disobeyed in Adam, and so those Christ obeyed and Trusted for, must be born again to believe and obey since they have already did so in Christ !

 

[prism]

4. God's Judgment:

• Your question about how God judges as guilty those whom He has formed raises a significant theological point. Within the Calvinistic framework, God's judgment is seen as part of His sovereign will, and the fallen nature of humanity is acknowledged as a result of the Fall.

This is the one 'sticking point' I have from being 'all in' with Calvinism as portrayed in it's Counter Remonstrance position. I just can't see how God can judge fairly by pronouncing 'Guilty!' those whom He has predestined to perdition or even has 'passed over' in election.
Perhaps I'm the inquiring one in 9:19? But I don't see my question as 'talking back' as in v.20, just a sincere question.

 

[Lees]

Hello Lees,

I appreciate your emphasis on focusing solely on what Scripture says, and I agree that a sober and straightforward examination of biblical passages is crucial. Let's indeed turn our attention to Romans 9:20-21 without unnecessary embellishments.

In the context of Romans 9:20-21, how do you interpret Paul's analogy of the potter and clay? What implications do you draw from it within your understanding of biblical doctrine? Let's engage in a thoughtful exploration, anchored in the Scriptures, as we seek to grasp the profound truths conveyed in this passage.

The whole of (Rom. 9-11) is the response of Paul to those he is writing to concerning the Jews unbelief in Christ and God's turning away from them. It is important to Paul to explain this in light of what he just got through saying in (Rom. 8:35-39). There he expounded on the faithfulness of God to those in Christ and how nothing could ever separate us from His love, from Him.

The question Paul knew that was in the mind of his reader/audience, was: 'well, what about the Jews? Has not God forsaken the Jews, His people? How can we know we are secure in Christ when God's people the Jews were not secure?'

So Paul is explaining, not all Israel are Israel. (Rom. 9:6-7) In other words, the believing Jews were secure. And only the believing Jews does God count as Israel. And, not all born of Abraham are counted as the faithful seed. For in Isaac is the seed called. Thus distinction is made between the children of promise, Isaac's seed, and the children of the flesh. (9:8)

All the children of promise are a promise from God, just like Isaac was. (Gal. 4:28) Because children of promise are a promise from God, it means it is His choice. His elect. Those who are not children of promise are of the flesh. And this promise, this election was done before any were born. (Rom. 9:11-13) And God hated Esau who was of the flesh. And God loved Jacob, who was a child of promise.

Paul anticipates that many will complain, concerning what he said, and accuse him of saying there is unrighteousness with God. (Rom. 9:14) (Rom. 9:14-24) is Paul answering that anticipated complaint. Which can be summed up by (9:20) "Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God?...."

In other words, those who are God's people, children of promise, who exercised believing faith in God, can know they are secure in God and Christ.

Lees

 

[prism]

And God hated Esau who was of the flesh.

Did God hate Esau because he ‘was of the flesh’?
Or was Esau ‘of the flesh’ because God hated him (did not bestow his grace/blessing on him)?

 

[Tulipbee]

The whole of (Rom. 9-11) is the response of Paul to those he is writing to concerning the Jews unbelief in Christ and God's turning away from them. It is important to Paul to explain this in light of what he just got through saying in (Rom. 8:35-39). There he expounded on the faithfulness of God to those in Christ and how nothing could ever separate us from His love, from Him.

The question Paul knew that was in the mind of his reader/audience, was: 'well, what about the Jews? Has not God forsaken the Jews, His people? How can we know we are secure in Christ when God's people the Jews were not secure?

So Paul is explaining, not all Israel are Israel. (Rom. 9:6-7) In other words, the believing Jews were secure. And only the believing Jews does God count as Israel. And, not all born of Abraham are counted as the faithful seed. For in Isaac is the seed called. Thus distinction is made between the children of promise, Isaac's seed, and the children of the flesh. (9:8)

All the children of promise are a promise from God, just like Isaac was. (Gal. 4:28) Because children of promise are a promise from God, it means it is His choice. His elect. Those who are not children of promise are of the flesh. And this promise, this election was done before any were born. (Rom. 9:11-13) And God hated Esau who was of the flesh. And God loved Jacob, who was a child of promise.

Paul anticipates that many will complain, concerning what he said, and accuse him of saying there is unrighteousness with God. (Rom. 9:14) (Rom. 9:14-24) is Paul answering that anticipated complaint. Which can be summed up by (9:20) "Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God?...."

In other words, those who are God's people, children of promise, who exercised believing faith in God, can know they are secure in God and Christ.

Lees

Your focus on the distinction between the believing Jews as the children of promise and the broader context of God's faithfulness to those in Christ aligns with certain Calvinistic perspectives.

Your emphasis on God's sovereign choice and election, particularly the example of God's love for Jacob and rejection of Esau, reflects a view that resonates with the concepts of unconditional election and God's predestined plan for salvation.

As we delve into Romans 9:20-21, the potter and clay analogy serves as a powerful metaphor to illustrate God's authority in shaping and determining the destiny of individuals. In the Calvinistic lens, this reinforces the idea of God's sovereignty in choosing and molding vessels for His purposes.

Your anticipation of objections and Paul's response in Romans 9:14-24 corresponds with the broader Calvinistic defense against accusations of unrighteousness. The affirmation of believers' security in God and Christ, grounded in God's sovereign election and the exercise of believing faith, aligns with the assurance of salvation in many Calvinistic teachings.

 

[Tulipbee]

This is the one 'sticking point' I have from being 'all in' with Calvinism as portrayed in it's Counter Remonstrance position. I just can't see how God can judge fairly by pronouncing 'Guilty!' those whom He has predestined to perdition or even has 'passed over' in election.
Perhaps I'm the inquiring one in 9:19? But I don't see my question as 'talking back' as in v.20, just a sincere question.

Your sincere question about God's judgment within the Calvinistic framework is a valid and thought-provoking one. The tension between divine sovereignty and human responsibility often leads to deep theological contemplation.

In response to your concern, some Calvinistic perspectives might posit that God's judgment, though sovereign, is not arbitrary or unjust. In the Reformed tradition, it's understood that God's election and predestination are rooted in His divine wisdom and purposes, which, while mysterious to us, are inherently just.

One avenue of exploration within Calvinism might involve considering God's judgment in light of His holiness, righteousness, and the inherent sinfulness of humanity. The fallen nature of humanity, stemming from the Fall, provides a backdrop for understanding God's judgment as a response to human rebellion.

The tension you express echoes the intricate balance Calvinism seeks to maintain between divine sovereignty and human accountability. Exploring further, especially within the context of Romans 9, could shed additional light on how various Calvinistic thinkers grapple with these complex theological questions.

Your inquiring spirit aligns with the tradition of probing into profound truths, and it's a testament to the depth of theological reflection within the Christian faith.

 

[prism]

, it's understood that God's election and predestination are rooted in His divine wisdom and purposes, which, while mysterious to us, are inherently just.

I'm taught by logicians that this line of thinking is an 'appeal to mystery'; but then we have...
1 Corinthians 13:12 KJV
For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.

Which causes me to be wary of 'airtight' doctrines (which probably in itself is an appeal to mystery). lol

 

[Lees]

Your focus on the distinction between the believing Jews as the children of promise and the broader context of God's faithfulness to those in Christ aligns with certain Calvinistic perspectives.

Your emphasis on God's sovereign choice and election, particularly the example of God's love for Jacob and rejection of Esau, reflects a view that resonates with the concepts of unconditional election and God's predestined plan for salvation.

As we delve into Romans 9:20-21, the potter and clay analogy serves as a powerful metaphor to illustrate God's authority in shaping and determining the destiny of individuals. In the Calvinistic lens, this reinforces the idea of God's sovereignty in choosing and molding vessels for His purposes.

Your anticipation of objections and Paul's response in Romans 9:14-24 corresponds with the broader Calvinistic defense against accusations of unrighteousness. The affirmation of believers' security in God and Christ, grounded in God's sovereign election and the exercise of believing faith, aligns with the assurance of salvation in many Calvinistic teachings.

Good to hear Calvinist's are in agreement with me.

Lees

 

[Lees]

Did God hate Esau because he ‘was of the flesh’?
Or was Esau ‘of the flesh’ because God hated him (did not bestow his grace/blessing on him)?

God knows His people before they are born in the flesh. (Rom. 9:11) Just as He knows those who are not His. God hated Esau because He knew who he was. God loved Jacob because He knew who he was.

When God first placed man in the Garden before the Fall, and told them to 'replenish the earth', (Gen. 1:28), those born of Adam and Eve would have been all the children of God. But with the Fall, another 'seed line' was introduced. (Gen. 3:15) And now the world is populated with those of the flesh, and those of promise. And God knows who they all are, and hates and loves accordingly.

My opinion.

Lees

 

[Tulipbee]

I'm taught by logicians that this line of thinking is an 'appeal to mystery'; but then we have...
1 Corinthians 13:12 KJV
For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.

Which causes me to be wary of 'airtight' doctrines (which probably in itself is an appeal to mystery). lol

Ah, the divine dance of mysteries! Prism, your mention of 1 Corinthians 13:12 adds a biblical touch to our theological shindig. Let's waltz through the cosmic comedy of airtight doctrines with a Calvinistic twist.

Quoting Calvin on mysteries: John Calvin, in his "Institutes of the Christian Religion," acknowledges the sublime nature of divine matters. In Book 1, Chapter 17, Section 11, he says, "For we are now treating of things sublime, things lofty, things that excel our capacity of understanding."

Navigating the dance floor of divine wisdom: Prism, you're onto something. God's election and predestination, as Calvin outlines in the Institutes, are indeed rooted in divine wisdom. While our understanding may be like peering through a glass darkly, we find comfort in the promise that one day we'll know even as we are known.

Arminian moves in the dance: Arminians may join the dance, cautioning against airtight doctrines, emphasizing free will, and highlighting the role of human understanding in the dance of faith. It's a theological tango where mystery meets human reflection.

So, Prism, let's continue this divine dance, embracing the mystery, acknowledging the limitations of our understanding, and grooving to the rhythms of God's wisdom. After all, the cosmic comedy is best enjoyed with a dash of humility and a twirl of divine revelation. Shall we keep dancing through the mysteries?

 

[brightfame52]

Believers first believed in Christ !3


Its like this, as evidence of our Union and solidarity with Adam when he sinned and disobeyed, we are born sinners/unbelievers, likewise as an evidence of our Union and solidarity with Christ, we are born again into obedience and Faith ! There was a Union with Both Heads, Adam and Christ ! The Union with adam cause , or authors our unbelief, The Union with Christ causes or authors our Faith ! Hence Jesus unto believers is the Author and finisher of Our Faith ! See Heb 12:2 ! 12

 

[Tulipbee]

Believers first believed in Christ !3


Its like this, as evidence of our Union and solidarity with Adam when he sinned and disobeyed, we are born sinners/unbelievers, likewise as an evidence of our Union and solidarity with Christ, we are born again into obedience and Faith ! There was a Union with Both Heads, Adam and Christ ! The Union with adam cause , or authors our unbelief, The Union with Christ causes or authors our Faith ! Hence Jesus unto believers is the Author and finisher of Our Faith ! See Heb 12:2 ! 12

Ah, brightfame52, weaving a theological tapestry with threads of Union and solidarity! Let's take a stroll through the Calvinist garden, where the tulips bloom with precision and the dance of predestination unfolds like a divine ballet.

Now, in the Calvinistic realm, the spotlight shines on God's sovereignty, orchestrating the cosmic choreography of salvation. Picture this: a theological ballet where God, the master choreographer, leads the Elect in a dance of redemption. Calvin might say, "It's not merely our Union with Adam; it's the divine choreography of God's choosing and our subsequent Union with Christ."

You highlighted our Union and solidarity with Adam as the source of our unbelief. In the Calvinist script, this narrative unfolds with the concept of Total Depravity. Calvin, in his "Institutes," would likely echo the notion that our fallen nature, inherited from Adam, leaves us spiritually dead and in need of God's sovereign intervention.

Now, let's explore Hebrews 12:2, a verse that resonates in the Calvinist symphony. "Looking unto Jesus, the author and finisher of our faith." Calvinists would emphasize Jesus as not only the initiator but also the perfecter of our faith, leading the Elect from the opening act to the grand finale.

But, brightfame52, let's avoid the pitfalls of hypercalvinism. Calvinism, when balanced, acknowledges human responsibility and the universal call to repentance. The dance of predestination doesn't negate the genuine offer of salvation to all. Acts 17:30 beckons to the entire audience, inviting them to join the divine ballet.

So, in this theological performance, let's waltz through Calvin's writings and scripture, appreciating the divine choreography while ensuring the dance floor is open to all who hear the universal call. No gaslighting tricks – just a theological ballet where God's sovereignty and human response create a harmonious masterpiece!

 

[prism]

God knows His people before they are born in the flesh. (Rom. 9:11) Just as He knows those who are not His. God hated Esau because He knew who he was. God loved Jacob because He knew who he was.

God also knows who ALL of us are…corrupt sinners apart from Christ.

When God first placed man in the Garden before the Fall, and told them to 'replenish the earth', (Gen. 1:28), those born of Adam and Eve would have been all the children of God. But with the Fall, another 'seed line' was introduced. (Gen. 3:15) And now the world is populated with those of the flesh, and those of promise. And God knows who they all are, and hates and loves accordingly

I believe we are all ‘of the flesh’ until we are placed into Christ through faith, until then we have the serpent’s nature. (Eph 2:2,3)

 

[prism]

Arminian moves in the dance: Arminians may join the dance, cautioning against airtight doctrines, emphasizing free will, and highlighting the role of human understanding in the dance of faith. It's a theological tango where mystery meets human reflection.

So, Prism, let's continue this divine dance, embracing the mystery, acknowledging the limitations of our understanding, and grooving to the rhythms of God's wisdom. After all, the cosmic comedy is best enjoyed with a dash of humility and a twirl of divine revelation. Shall we keep dancing through the mysteries?

Yes, Arminians have their own Tango/Tangle of mysteries to navigate, often coming up short of doctrinal coherence, so why one and not the other, except some explanations are more coherent than the others. Are you saying, ‘which partner one picks is the important thing? I’ll pick Jesus. (That was quite Arminian of me). Which Jesus? (That would be more biblical). The one who chose me! (That was quite Calvinistic of me lol). I guess I’m a clumsy dancer

 

[Lees]

God also knows who ALL of us are…corrupt sinners apart from Christ.

I believe we are all ‘of the flesh’ until we are placed into Christ through faith, until then we have the serpent’s nature. (Eph 2:2,3)

That all are sinners due to Adam's sin is no revelation. My point was, God knows us before we are born in flesh. Which you somehow ignored.

No. (Rom. 9:11) is clear, which you ignore. God's knowledge of who He hates and loves exists before we are born.

You want to say we are all sinners. Ok. Big deal. And you say nothing of the children of promise.

Those who are of God, who are children of promise, never, and I repeat, never had the serpents nature. What do you base your statement on that until the children of promise comes to saving faith in Christ, they have the nature of Satan?

Lees

 

[prism]

Those who are of God, who are children of promise, never, and I repeat, never had the serpents nature. What do you base your statement on that until the children of promise comes to saving faith in Christ, they have the nature of Satan?

Ephesians 2:1-3 KJV
And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins; [2] Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience: [3] Among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others.

The whole concept of the new birth implies a new nature, no?

2 Corinthians 5:17 KJV
Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.

nature of satan?

John 8:44 ESV
You are of your father the devil, and your will is to do your father's desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks out of his own character, for he is a liar and the father of lies.

 

[Lees]

Ephesians 2:1-3 KJV
And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins; [2] Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience: [3] Among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others.

The whole concept of the new birth implies a new nature, no?

2 Corinthians 5:17 KJV
Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.

nature of satan?

John 8:44 ESV
You are of your father the devil, and your will is to do your father's desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks out of his own character, for he is a liar and the father of lies.

Yes we were children of 'wrath'. Not children of Satan.

Yes, we were lost. But we were children of promise which is why we were 'lost'. We were lost because we were always of God. The term 'lost' should only apply to those who are of God. Those who are of the flesh, of the devil were never lost And will never be of God.

Yes, we who are children of promise, were lost, and needed a new nature. Needed to be born-again. (John 3:5) But we would never be born-again if our origin, being of God, was not right. (John 3:3) "...Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God." 'Born again' there means 'born from above'. Because our origin is right, we can see and enter the kingdom. (John 3:5) "...Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God."

As I said earlier, when God created Adam and Eve and told them to go and 'replenish' the earth, (Gen. 1:28), all the children to come He was speaking of were of Him. But after the Fall, another seed line is introduced, (Gen. 3:15), and all born of Adam are fallen. Both those of God and those not of God. Those who are lost, who are 'of God' are the children of promise. Those who are of the flesh, of Satan, were never lost as they never were 'of God'. They are at home in this world ruled by their father.

Jesus came to save those who were lost. (Luke 19:10) And all the lost will be saved. (Luke 15:1-10)

My opinion.

Lees