It's good to hear from you, brother. I am glad to know that your friend is still studying the Bible with you. That's good news!
In answering her questions, the central theme is to challenge the assumption. Highlight the prejudiced interpretation - kindly, of course. You want to both explain the passages and teach how to study the Bible in general. Generally, the more you look at the context, the better you can see and demonstrate how each verse was taken out of context. (For example, I will spend extra time on this first one.)
** About
Jeremiah 13:23:
Can the Ethiopian change his skin or the leopard its spots? Then may you also do good who are accustomed to do evil. (Jeremiah 13:23)
The Calvinistic interpretation is that the Ethiopian and leopard are both born a certain way. Furthermore, these qualities are inherent with their identity. It is impossible for these people to change, because they were born that way. This proves inherited depravity and demands unconditional election and irresistible grace. At least, that is how a Calvinist might would present it.
Answer: True, the Jews had become virtually depraved. But, why were these Jews accustomed to doing evil? Were they born accustomed, or had they chosen it? Clearly, the point being stressed is the difficulty of their repentance, which should have produced a sense of gravity and sobriety. But, did that difficulty arise from their intrinsic nature, or did they choose that burden? Furthermore, although difficult, was it necessarily impossible for them to change? Maybe the Calvinistic interpretation reads too much into the illustration? Do you see the assumption? Let's look at a few verses in the surrounding context to find our answer:
'This evil people, who refuse to hear My words, who follow the dictates of their hearts, and walk after other gods to serve them and worship them, shall be just like this sash which is profitable for nothing. For as the sash clings to the waist of a man, so I have caused the whole house of Israel and the whole house of Judah to cling to Me,' says the LORD, 'that they may become My people, for renown, for praise, and for glory; but they would not hear.' Therefore you shall speak to them this word ... (Jeremiah 13:10-12)
First, please notice these people made a choice. They refused to hear God. They listened to their own hearts. They exhibited a desire for evil. Second, God tried to redeem them by His own confession, and He was thwarted by their unwillingness to hear. Now, that leaves us with only a few explanations. Either, God lied, and He did not really try (wrong! -> evil god). Or, God tried, but man was depraved, and God failed (wrong! -> weak god). Or, God tried, but man was permitted to reject God (Consistent! Just and right God, evil man). Based on these first two points alone, unless you accept free will, I don't know how to avoid blaspheming God according to this verse.
Hear and give ear: Do not be proud, For the LORD has spoken. Give glory to the LORD your God Before He causes darkness, And before your feet stumble On the dark mountains, ... But if you will not hear it, My soul will weep in secret for your pride; My eyes will weep bitterly And run down with tears, Because the LORD's flock has been taken captive. Say to the king and to the queen mother, "Humble yourselves; Sit down, For your rule shall collapse, the crown of your glory." ... (Jeremiah 13:15-18)
Third, notice that God entreats these people to hear Him and humble themselves. Why would God entreat a people who
cannot hear? Is He mocking them? No! Notice that He is grieved and is begging. Here, the Calvinist must admit that God has perpetrated a great deception throughout the Bible, as exemplified here: Everywhere, God begs men to repent, knowing they cannot, acting as if they had a choice, when then they never had a chance. It is a great deception that serves no purpose, except to justify Calvinism.
Fourthly, notice that His grief is dependent upon their actions - not Him - but them. He will only weep,
if they do not hear. That possibility necessarily implies that they could hear and that possibility did not depend upon God, but upon them! There is no uncertainty about God with God, unless we are again willing to blaspheme is nature. Therefore, we must conclude that they could change themselves and their fate, and at this point, they governed that outcome.
And if you say in your heart, "Why have these things come upon me?" For the greatness of your iniquity Your skirts have been uncovered, Your heels made bare. Can the Ethiopian change his skin or the leopard its spots? Then may you also do good who are accustomed to do evil. Therefore I will scatter them like stubble That passes away by the wind of the wilderness. This is your lot, The portion of your measures from Me," says the LORD, "Because you have forgotten Me And trusted in falsehood. (Jeremiah 13:22-25)
Fifthly, notice whom God blames. Was it Adam? Were any of their forefathers to blame? No, they were responsible. They were punished and humiliated for their great iniquity - no one else. This again disproves inherited depravity. Sixthly, notice that God says they had forgotten Him. How can you forget someone you never knew? This proves they had not always been this way. Therefore, they could not have been born depraved!
I have seen your adulteries And your lustful neighings, The lewdness of your harlotry, Your abominations on the hills in the fields. Woe to you, O Jerusalem! Will you still not be made clean?" (Jeremiah 13:27)
Clearly, this whole chapter is a great call to repentance. That very fact says that these people could change. God highlights the magnitude of their sin, the difficulty to change, and the severity of their pending doom. It was a profound and urgent warning. It was a call to wake-up! This was not some burden to take lightly. The last phrase points out the imminent danger and their disruptive pride. Moreover, this last phrase also shows that they could change, but they were generally unwilling, on account of their own pride! Therefore, this verse, when taken in context of the whole chapter, actually disproves inherited depravity and unconditional election: These people could change, and they had an obligation to do so, or else, they would suffer.
** About
Psalm 51:12:
Create in me a clean heart, O God, And renew a steadfast spirit within me. Do not cast me away from Your presence, And do not take Your Holy Spirit from me. Restore to me the joy of Your salvation, And uphold me by Your generous Spirit. (Psalm 51:10-12)
I assume you have already answered
Psalm 51:5. Unfortunately, I do not really understand the argument from
Psalm 51:12. Admittedly, there is some clear intervention by the Holy Spirit. (Verse
12:11b could be a reference to David's inspiration by the Holy Spirit as the Psalmist, which is clearly referenced in the following verses, 13-15.)
Again, it is prejudiced interpretation to assume this redeeming influence was irresistible or effected by a direct manipulation of David's heart. For example, earlier in the context, David said:
Make me hear joy and gladness, That the bones You have broken may rejoice. (Psalm 51:8)
Clearly, this figuratively refers to the weight of guilt that David felt from his sin. But, how were David's bones "broken" by the Lord? Did God reach into David's body and snap his bones? No, it's a spiritual figure. So, Did directly God reach into his soul and crush David's heart? No, He used a medium - the words of an inspired prophet:
Then Nathan said to David, "You are the man! Thus says the LORD God of Israel: 'I anointed you king over Israel, and I delivered you ... For you did it secretly, but I will do this thing before all Israel, before the sun.' " So David said to Nathan, "I have sinned against the LORD." (II Samuel 12:7-13)
If from this very context, we know that God can break a man's heart with words through a prophet, why would we assume that direct intervention from the Holy Spirit was required to fix it? Could God not fix David's heart in the same way He broke it, with a message from God? Furthermore, wasn't David's broken spirit contingent upon his reaction to the words of Nathan? Could he not have killed Nathan, as did evil kings that followed him? Therefore, David's restoration would also be dependent upon his chosen reaction to the words of hope and peace. I really don't see how this verse helps to diminish any of the arguments against Calvinism...
Beyond this, I don't see how one could say that free-will diminishes one's joy in the Lord or sense of grief and loss over His disapproval? As I said, I am not really sure what the argument is, but it seems there is likely a lot of assumption for its foundation.
More explanation is needed to really answer this question.
** About
Luke 10:20:
Yes, men's names may be written in heaven, but that only speaks to their present status before the Lord. Remember, names can be written, but they can also be
blotted out (
Revelation 3:5)! We should not assume that a written name cannot be erased. ... Keep in mind to whom Jesus addressed this verse. It was the seventy, which would have surely included the twelve, which included Judas! Was Judas saved?
** About
II Timothy 2:19:
And their message will spread like cancer. Hymenaeus and Philetus are of this sort, who have strayed concerning the truth, saying that the resurrection is already past; and they overthrow the faith of some. Nevertheless the solid foundation of God stands, having this seal: "The Lord knows those who are His," and, "Let everyone who names the name of Christ depart from iniquity." (II Timothy 2:17-19)
Her answer shows she is not coming to grips with this text. Your job will be to politely, kindly, lovingly point the contradictions between her watered down interpretation and the language of the text:
These people were not just "confused" in their faith. Their faith was "
overthrown"! Here is what "overthrow" means:
[Thayer] avatrepo - to overthrow, overturn, destroy; ethically, to subvert: oikous families, Titus 1:11 ... 2 Tim. 2:18. (Common in Greek writings, and in the same sense.)*
Friberg, Barclay, Lidell-Scott and others also use the word "ruin".
We need to stop and ask, "Can a person be saved without faith?" (Read
Hebrews 11:6.) Therefore, can he be saved if his faith his overthrown, overturned, destroyed, or ruined? These people were not just confused, they were lost!
Yes, the word, seal, can indicate protection. And, this verse clearly teaches that God knows who are truly His. But what makes someone truly belong to Him? This passage does not say anything about being judged based on our heart. It speaks of being judged based on our deeds (
"depart from iniquity"). Plus, look a little further down in the context (
II Timothy 2:24-26). We must correct those who have been subverted using the truth. If they do not accept it, then they will stay entrapped by the Devil, bound to do his will. Does that sound like a saved condition? Read from verse 19 to the end of the chapter. ... God knows who are His, based on what we
do, not how we
feel.
** About
Isaiah 49:14-16:
This refers to God's continued faithfulness toward His people. He chastens wayward souls and nations. However, He has shown that He will ultimately abandon a nation or an individual, if they prove themselves to be hopeless ("no remedy",
II Chronicles 36:26).
It is an answer to their despondency:
But Zion said, "The LORD has forsaken me, And my Lord has forgotten me." Can a woman forget her nursing child, And not have compassion on the son of her womb? Surely they may forget, Yet I will not forget you. See, I have inscribed you on the palms of My hands; Your walls are continually before Me." (Isaiah 49:14-16)
It is not a pledge to save them regardless of their actions. The next few verses show that He
will put away those who do forget Him (
Isaiah 50:1-2; see previous,
Jeremiah 13:22-25). Beside Zion's fear, the only party forgetting anybody in this passage are mothers of nursing children. God is saying that they will forget their children
before He forgets the remnant, Zion.
Again, I think too much is being read into this verse, which cannot be supported by either the immediate or global context.
...
Well, it's getting late, and I'm getting tired.
I hope this helps. If I didn't spend enough time on some part, or if I missed something please let me know, I'll be happy to provide a brief answer.
BTW, please do not forward this to her. I worded this bluntly and sharply for your benefit. If you ever want to drop by and talk about these things, let me know.
Both you and your friend will be in my prayers,
m273p15c