Sir pTrader, I know that we will never agree on this issue, so just treat this discussion as a presentation of our respective beliefs for the benefit of those interested in learning about the two sides.
Kung minsan may sarcasm din ako, but know that it's just a debating style, nothing more.
Sinisingitan talaga ng sarcasm yon to give the impression of confidence --- that you're very sure of what you're saying. Pero hindi rin puwedeng sobra ang sarcasm, because that will give the impression of desperation, which is not good for the audience's impression.
So yung konting sarcasm ko, debating techniques lang yon, it's nothing personal.
Tanungin mo si sir dpogs, may konting asaran din kami, but in the end, we agree that we will not be able to convince each other. Basta pareho kaming naniniwala sa Diyos, pareho kaming naniniwala sa bibliya. Yung differences in doctrine, those are small details.
==================================
Tagalog na po yung nasa baba. Ang Dios po ang humihirang kahit inde pa ho ipinapanganak yung tao.
11Sapagka't ang mga anak nang hindi pa ipinanganganak, at hindi pa nagsisigawa ng anomang mabuti o masama, upang ang layon ng Dios ay mamalagi alinsunod sa pagkahirang, na hindi sa mga gawa, kundi doon sa tumatawag
Ang Diyos ang humihirang kahit hindi pa pinanganganak.
Humihirang ng ano? Humihirang ng magiging lahi ng Israel.
Romans 9 shows us God's choices as to the forefathers or "patriarchs" of the nation Israel --- Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.
The traditional choice should have been Ishmael, yet God chose Isaac to receive the blessing of Abraham, to become the patriarch of the chosen nation from which Jesus would come.
Esau the firstborn should have been the traditional choice, yet God chose Jacob over Esau to continue the family line to Jesus.
In both of these cases, God chose the second-born over the firstborn. Why was Jacob given the right? Because of what Jacob had done? No, because God is sovereign and will choose whom he wants.
mali po ito, eto ang nasa Bibliya:
Pansinin nyo po yung salitang "kundi ang mga anak sa pangako'y siyang ibibilang na isang binhi."
7Ni sapagka't sila'y binhi ni Abraham, ay mga anak na silang lahat: kundi, Kay Isaac tatawagin ang iyong binhi. 8Sa makatuwid, ay hindi mga anak sa laman ang mga anak ng Dios: kundi ang mga anak sa pangako'y siyang ibibilang na isang binhi.
Pansinin din ang salitang "binhi."
Ano daw yung binhi? E di binhi ng lahing israel.
Kay Isaac tatawagin ang iyong binhi. --- Meaning, hindi kay Ishmael, kahit panganay si Ishmael.
8Sa makatuwid, ay hindi mga anak sa laman ang mga anak ng Dios: kundi ang mga anak sa pangako'y siyang ibibilang na isang binhi. --- Si Isaac na hindi panganay ang pinili ng Diyos, kasi hindi batay sa lahi ng laman ang mga anak ng Diyos.
E di hindi elect sa langit yan. Ang sinasabing elect ay yung elect na magiging lahi ng Israel.
Lahi ng ligtas sa langit? Hindi. Lahi ng pagmumulan ni Hesus na tagapagligtas. Kung ligtas na, bakit kailangan pa ng darating na tagapagligtas?
Pag member ka ba ng lahing Israel, siguradong ligtas ka na? Hindi.
30 What then shall we say? That the Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, have obtained it, a righteousness that is by faith; 31 but the people of Israel, who pursued the law as the way of righteousness, have not attained their goal. 32 Why not? Because they pursued it not by faith but as if it were by works. They stumbled over the stumbling stone. (Rom. 9:30-32) Kita mo na. Israel was the chosen nation -- the elect. Yet they stumbled and did not attain their goal. The Gentiles, who were not part of the Israel nation, obtained righteousness by faith.
That's the point of Isaac and Jacob.
Dapat si Ishmael, but God chose Isaac. Dapat si Esau, but God chose Jacob.
Jacob was chosen over Esau before he was born. Chosen, yes. But chosen for what?
Not chosen for eternal salvation or damnation, but chosen in the plan of the Messianic and Israelite blood lines.
===================================
Next, I will discuss the entire Romans 9-11, so that the Calvinist misinterpretation will stand out even more clearly.