Accountability for Conscious Rejection of God's Mercy

Continual, persistent, conscious rejection of God's mercy makes men accountable to God's wrath.

"The wrath of God comes upon the sons of disobedience." The Greek word for "disobedience" is ἀπειθέω - "to be unpersuaded" Here is the definition copied from Bible Hub - (literally, refuse to be persuaded.)

The writer's use of ἀπειθέω underscores the willful aspect of the hearer's refusing to be persuaded by the word of the Lord. Accountability for persistent refusal to be persuaded is carefully documented whenever God declares His wrath upon any people, and especially when He sends judgment upon His own chosen people.

This accountability is thoroughly established in the New Testament. Men will be condemned and will suffer God's wrath because of their conscious, persistent rejection of the gospel. Having heard the word of truth, they refused to be persuaded by the word they have heard and are thus categorized as "those who refused to be persuaded."

This conscious rejection of God's word, His law, and even God Himself is carefully documented in the history of the prophets and the people of Israel. The writers of the New Testament employed the specific language found throughout the prophets. Our Lord came to fulfill the words of the prophets and He Himself used the same language to establish the accountability for rejecting God's mercy.

One example of this can be found in a thorough study of the word ἀθετέω - "to set aside" [Usage: I annul, make of no effect, set aside, ignore, slight; I break faith with.]
This word is used by our Lord in these key passages:

Luke 7:30 - "But the Pharisees and lawyers rejected the will of God for themselves, not having been baptized by him"

Luke 10:16 - "He who hears you hears Me, he who rejects you rejects Me, and he who rejects Me rejects Him who sent Me".

The same word is used as a summary of the rejection of the Jewish people who witnessed the glory of the Lord's works done in their very midst.

John 12:48 - " He who rejects Me, and does not receive My words, has that which judges him””the word that I have spoken will judge him in the last day."

To fully appreciate this "rejection" and to soberly contemplate the implications of Jesus using this term, one needs to understand how often it is found in the prophets' summaries of Israel's persistent refusal to be persuaded to return to the Lord. Our Lord KNEW how and where this word was used to describe Israel's persistent, prolonged stubbornness. The Lord was always careful to document His reasons for sending devastating judgments.

If you desire to research this yourself, allow me to suggest one method available to those with access to the digital bible helps that are readily available and free.

If you download esword, a bible software program, and you download the Apostolic Polyglot into esword, you can use the search engine feature to access every use of a particular Greek word in both the Old and New Testament. The Apostolic Polyglot version is displayed in an interlinear format with the Strong's number affixed above the words. When you "right click" upon the Strong's number, a box will appear that allows you to choose a search for that specific word in either the Old Testament, New Testament, or both.

This feature will allow you to locate and study the use of any Greek word in the New Testament so that you can see how it was used in the Old Testament. The writers of the New Testament would have been keenly aware of these words and would have had them in their minds when they chose to use them in their own admonitions.

As a sample of this method, and in order to minimize the space required for posting every scripture in its entirety, I have listed several examples of the Greek word ἀθετέω for those who desire to look into this further.

ἀθετέω strongs #114

Isaiah 1:2
II Chronicles 36:14
Jeremiah 5:11
Jeremiah 15:16

I Thessalonians 4:8
Hebrews 10:28

If anyone has questions about how to use the method that I put forth, please ask me and I will attempt to help clarify.

I have only provided one such word to study. For those who desire to look further into the idea of man's accountability for conscious rejection of God's mercy, there are many other words that establish the continuity of this truth in their Old Testament and New Testament settings.

If there is an interest shown to look into this further, I will provide more examples using these other words.

mak

Isa. 26:9 ”“
For when the earth experiences Your judgments
The inhabitants of the world learn righteousness.

Great stuff Mak: I love esword and Ive used it for the last 20 years when it first came out.

You might also find it interesting that without the inworking of God himself, the sinner always rejects, he always goes astray, his heart though moral in his own estimation is estranged and alienated through wicked works.

This truth of 'conscious rejection' highlights the depravity of sinful humanity. In the face of all that God has said and done by way of judgments, man ignores it and says "I have made a better plan than others, I have prepared better than others, I have secured myself better than others, I shall not suffer the same fate".

There seems to me that there is a subtle difference between what Mak wrote and what Marvin is saying. Subtle, but huge in import.

If God makes it impossible for some (actually, the vast majority) of humans incapable of responding toward Him, then how are they in truth accountable? It’s a logical absurdity. As Mak points out scripture is clear that man IN FACT is accountable because he, himself, rejects God.

How would my son be accountable to me if I command him to do the impossible, particularly if only I have the means of making it possible? If I tell him to mow the grass but I have locked up the lawnmower and hidden the key, how is he accountable for not cutting the grass?

Hi Todd:

Thanks for using such an excellent example for me to further clarify.

It is true Dad locked up the means in which to obey him in his own place. The Son, is accountable to Dad to mow the yard, without the mower the son will fail to mow the yard and the Father will not receive from the son the obedience and good works he was assigned. What is the solution?

For many, it seems there is no solution. The son is powerless, the son is going to fail his duty, the Father is going to be given nothing for his command to duty.
For many, the answer lay in the Father's cruelty, it lay in the Father's giving a command to the son and not giving the son the power/enabling/tools to offer the obedience the Father required.

To others, there is a solution. What is the solution? The Father said "ask of me", "pray to me", "seek me", The very things that God will give to the son in order for him to obey starts with the son returning to the Father and saying "give to me what I need to fulfill your will". Father, open the door, unlock the lock, show me how to use the mower that I might do your will and mow the yard".

In this analogy there is an implied relationship between the father and the son, whereby the son has access to the father and by petition access to all the Father has.

But the darkened sinner, the alienated, the estranged, the outcast and the unholy do not have that relationship whereby all that the Father would give is able to be received. For them, they do not know there is a mower, they do not know God has provided a means to satisfy his own commands.
But we also know that the sinner is not simply incapacitated, he is at war with God, in his heart there is enmity against God. In the sinners heart he stays away from God because if he comes his deeds will be reproved.
Not only does he not mow the yard, he refused to know of any mower, any offer to open the locked door, any kindness the father has offered to him.

The kind of person that is rejecting the God, is rejecting the means of God, the people of God, the gospel of God, God's providences.

It would be a gross mischaracterization to say "oh I would have happily obeyed God if he had only done his part". To assume something like that would be to make an assumption the whole of scripture never assumes, it in fact substantiates the very opposite.

Hi Marvin-

I appreciate your response and I do follow it, but I do not see how your clarification solves the problem. The exceedingly large majority of persons that God does not reach out to first are still going to be punished for not doing the impossible.

You may be saying, in essence, that it is not unfair that God only chooses a few to reach out to; rather it is "super-fair” that he chooses any at all.

I have never been a fan of that argument, even when my youth pastor tried to make it when I was in the 7th grade.

Hi Todd and Marvin,

We do not need to create our own analogies, we have the analogies the Lord Himself gave to the prophets.

Consider this analogy in Jeremiah 2 "Yet I had planted you a noble vine, a seed of highest quality. How then have you before Me Into the degenerate plant of an alien vine?
Note: God calls Israel "noble" and "a seed of highest quality" The question is how did that which was so good become corrupt?

God gave Jeremiah another analogy in Chapter 13, the analogy of the "flaxen linen cloth". You are likely already familiar with what Jeremiah was told to do. Here is God's summary:

"Thus says the Lord: ‘In this manner I will ruin the pride of Judah and the great pride of Jerusalem. 10 This evil people, who do not purpose to obey 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. 11 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.’

Notice what the Lord charges - He focuses on their CHOICE
"This evil people NOT PURPOSING TO OBEY My words...."
LXX - Septuagint μη βουλομένους υπακούειν

Refusal to hear, not purposing to obey, is the basis for the devastating judgment and statements like "My eye shall not spare, I will show no mercy." All this from the God who "desires mercy" and "does not will the death of the wicked."

Over and over again, the Lord recounts His attempts to turn the hearts of Israel back to Himself, and He leaves no doubt in any reader's mind that Israel's refusal to hear, is DELIBERATE, PERSISTENT, and HARDENED. It is their rejection of His attempt to be merciful to them that provokes Him to pour out His full rage upon them.

This "refusal to hear", "Deliberate rejection of God's call to return" is best summed up in a word that gives a clear picture of prolonged unbelief.
That word is "ἀπειθέω" - the refusal to be persuaded

Consider how it is used in the New Testament

John 3:36 - He who believes in the Son has everlasting life; and the one refusing to be persuaded by the Son shall not
see life, but the wrath of God abides on him."

Paul chooses the same word to summarize all who will experience the wrath of God coming upon them.

Ephesians 5:6 and Colossians 3:6 - " Let no one deceive you with empty words, for because of these things the wrath of God comes upon the sons who refuse to be persuaded."

This same word is the main word used to summarize the reason for God's judgment in the following passages. For the sake of space and time, I will simply list the verses. If you study the context, you will understand why the New Testament writer chose to use ἀπειθέω.

God does not destroy men for being fornicators, liars, adulterers, murderers, idolaters, covetous, drunkards, gluttons, etc. He is willing to forgive all such sins, if men will hear His word, repent and believe. Many of us are guilty of these same sins and yet we have received mercy. Judgment comes upon men not because God is unwilling to forgive their sins, but because they persistently refuse to hear, believe and be reconciled to Him. They refuse to be persuaded to be corrected and reconciled to Him.

Here are other passages where ἀπειθέω makes men's accountability for refusal to hear abundantly clear.

Romans 2:8
Romans 10:21
Hebrews 3:18
Hebrews 4:6
Hebrews 4:11
I Peter 2:9
I Peter 3:20
I Peter 4:17

In case you have questions about the translation "refuse to be persuaded". I have taken this directly from scholars who assigned this meaning. For your convenience I have copied this directly from Bible Hub

Original Word: ἀπείθεια, ας, ἡ
Part of Speech: Noun, Feminine
Transliteration: apeitheia
Phonetic Spelling: (ap-i'-thi-ah)
Definition: disobedience
Usage: willful unbelief, obstinacy, disobedience.

543 apeítheia(from 1 /A "not" and 3982 /peíthō, "persuaded") ”“ properly, someone not persuaded, referring to their willful unbelief, i.e. the refusal to be convinced by God's voice. This is the core-meaning of the entire word-family: 543 (apeítheia), 544 (apeithéō), 545 (apeithḗs). All these cognates focus on man's decision to reject God's offers of faith, i.e. refusal to be persuaded in their heart concerning obeying His will (Word).

mak

Mak-

Do you see the "refusal to be persuaded” as an issue of will, or an issue of inability?

I think all would agree that we are born with a selfish sinful nature. Therefore, Todd's question is the ultimate question. How can I be accountable for sin that I commit by virtue of a nature I inherited and did not personally and freely choose? And if we, before coming to Jesus, are freely able to fight sin and defeat sin because of prevenient grace, then why have none been able or successful? Clearly, there remain some sins, maybe a lot, that billions of people will be accountable for if they die apart from Christ that are due to a sinful nature we did not ask for, agree to or voluntarily accept.

It really is a huge question. One which no one will find a Biblical answer for other than simply that God allowed Adam's nature to continue on through his descendants for His own mysterious reasons; an inherited nature that will cause those descendants to resist God, be hostile to God and ultimately to be accountable to God in spite of the fact that the sinful nature was inherited.

Personally, I wish there were a Biblically explicit answer. We can't bootstrap one by a fairness argument from our own minds though.

Paul makes it clear in Romans 7 that the man of the flesh has a conscience that has some desire to do the will of God but he has a much stronger flesh that desires the sin and that man is unable to resist the desires of his own flesh, desires that are inherited, of his own nature, and that are stirred up by sin but desires that nonetheless belong to the man. The freedom from the desires that cause us to sin comes when we die with Christ, not before. The man of the flesh is unable to please God by the doing of His will until the flesh and sin is condemned in the man by being joined to and indwelt by another...Christ.

This Christmas season we will no doubt hear or see the movie "Its a wonderful life"...and oldie and a goodie.

No, I wouldn't start a study on angels by its presentation of an angel...so lets get that out of the way.

But the one pervasive message the movie delivers is
"One mans life can make a huge difference in others lives"

So, said Robert..."that billions of people will be accountable for if they die apart from Christ that are due to a sinful nature we did not ask for, agree to or voluntarily accept."

We all know Adam was the culprit, now because what He did, and what Eve did, everyone else suffers. One man affected the lives of countless others.

So, too, Jesus Christ who being one man, affected countless others by what he did.

I appreciate the candor in which Robert addressed this issue. There is nothing worse than ignoring the elephant in the room, or attempting to paint the elephant the same color as the wall and say "well, I don't see any elephant here".

We can yell loudly all day about man's choice and his hard heart and that's why God judged man. But that's not the whole story and anyone reading scripture knows this.
I've never denied the sinful nature of man nor his accountability before God as a moral creation, made to know God and his word and obey and love both. But the "elephant" is that God has a choice too in the salvation of man, you cannot paint it out with greek or with human reasoning or with scripture quotes...which are used to nullify other scripture quotes.

Our whole lives are predicated upon God's decisions we have no input into, nor do we have veto power if we did think we could nullify his decision.

Scripture presents both of these important aspects of God's person and working in the world, denying them by reason of their inconvenience to our way of thinking is useless and in fact becomes a stumbling block to knowing God as scripture presents him.

I don't hear anyone bring up the Romans 9 analogies? I don't read anyone willing to admit to God's choice? Why? Are we so hateful toward God that to admit his role in the salvation of man must mean we take a disliking to him?

When you can write the same quantity of insights into God's choices in the matters of men as you do the failings men, chances are, you can offer a more biblical perspective.
But, until then, its an uncertain sound a distorted vision.

Brother Marvin.

Thanks for your reply. There is a Puritan quote I often refer to. It is....”If I had the power of God I would change everything. If I also had the wisdom of God I would change nothing. ". I embrace God’s grace in salvation and I was only focusing on the issue being discussed which I saw as the condition of man.

Hi Robert: it was a great post, I appreciate summaries and I appreciate both aspects being taken into consideration.

I realize the men and women I am responding to are well versed and articulate, they hold contrary views but we do not hold a contrary gospel, our gospel is a gospel to be preached to all men in all nations with the expectancy of God's answer to bring in the lost until God has all of his Elect.

When we go out to preach the precious promises of God contained in the gospel, we do not know who will respond or who will reject, we do not know how God will work among the peoples who hear that message, we also do not concern ourselves with who is Elect and who is not. Our concern is with being faithful to our Savior and faithful witnesses of his Spirit and word as he has worked in our own lives.

No gospel-minded preacher says "well, he didn't believe my message he is not the elect of God". Can we be sure we are the last witness of God to that man or woman? There may be some who answered the call of God to be saved upon their first hearing. I for one, didn't answer for years, I heard and refused, heard and refused and heard again and still refused...with blasphemies, cursing, mocking. Yet God in his goodness sent another messenger. God pursued me, I didn't pursue God at any time. I was an atheist, my parents were atheists, my family were mostly atheists or agnostics.

Yet, I do not hold my beliefs from reverse-engineering my own conversion and thereby make scripture to fit my experience. To the contrary, what I learned from scripture is that God seeks, God calls, God works, God appears, God speaks...all to wicked men who didn't seek him or want him.
I found my own conversion unnecessary to substantiate God's pursuit of men, I have abundant testimony from God himself as to his own willingness to save.

I would have needed little more than one single sentence from one verse to prove my sinful heart and failings...it was easy to be persuaded as to my own condition, what took me by surprise was a God who by his own will and purpose chose to reveal Jesus Christ to me. I had nothing, no family, no religious feelings, no Christian interest, no heart whatsoever toward anything having to do with the bible, Church or God.
I am saved, I am exactly like multitudes that have gone down to the pit and will eventually be cast into the lake of fire. It would be no shock to me if I found out vastly better men, more educated, more moral, with godly families, with a godly heritage, without mocking, blasphemies and disrespect toward God...and they are yet in hell.

Who would chose me over them? No one, no one would with a right mind. To me, salvation has nothing to do with fair/unfair or super-fair, to me it has to do with the God who gives grace to sinners. There is no other plausible reason for my own salvation than that.

I take my own doctrines for a spin, I know God has granted me grace and kindness...and it sure wasn't because I made the choice to believe. I found out I believed because of grace and kindness which God gave to me while I was a blasphemer.

Hi Todd,

You asked - "Do you see the "refusal to be persuaded” as an issue of will, or an issue of inability?"

I can share with you my considerations of that question, but I am not claiming to have an answer. I am intrigued by some of the mysteries in the scriptures and I am learning that they are too deep for me to claim to fully know a matter prematurely. "It is the glory of God to conceal a matter, and the glory of kings to search it out."

I will share with you my present thoughts, so that you and others on the forum can consider them along with me. Perhaps contemplating them together, we can all benefit from one another.

There is a passage in Hebrews that has Greek word for "not persuaded" and "ability" in the same context.

Hebrews 3:18-19 "And to whom did He swear by oath not to enter into His rest if not to the ones who refused to be persuade. And we see that they were not able to enter because of unbelief."

Here we have the people categorized as "those who were not persuaded." We are also given the cause of their "inability". The reason for their "inability" was THEIR OWN UNBELIEF."

Indwelling sin was not named as the reason for their "inability", rather their "inability" was due to "unbelief"

Does "indwelling sin" prevent men from believing? No, we have an entire group of men who obtained witness that they "believed" God. All of these men had indwelling sin.
It is evident then that "indwelling sin" does not prevent men from hearing and believing God.

Sin does enslave men, and corrupt them, but does it prevent men from "being able" to believe? The scriptures do not seem to indicate that sin prevents men from hearing and believing God.

For example, Cain was warned that "sin was crouching and desiring to master him". Cain was being shown the way of escape, but he failed to embrace the help God offered and gave in to sin.

There are other men listed in scripture who were not controlled by sin in the same way that Cain was.
Enoch, Noah, Job, Abraham, Isaac, Joseph, Moses, Joshua, Caleb, Hannah, Samuel, Naomi, Ruth, David, and many of the prophets. All of these men and women had the same sinful nature that we are born with and yet - "indwelling sin" did not prevent them from believing, and following the Lord.
None of them were "perfect" and never sinned, but God Himself called many of them "perfect, upright, and righteous".

We are also aware of Zachariah and Elizabeth, Mary, Joseph, Simeon, Anna, and Cornelius in the New Testament. All of these had one trait in common, they were approved by God as people who were devout.

"Total depravity" did not prevent them from finding favor with God, despite the reality that every one of them still needed God's mercy and forgiveness. Their lives were contrasted as different from the other people of their time.

Lack of faith, is more the cause for men's disability than "indwelling sin". Consider the testimony of Abraham.
When faced with a body almost 100 years old and the deadness of Sarah's womb, he did not waiver in unbelief but was "ENABLED BY FAITH". Yes, he was enabled by faith to come to a "full assurance" and this is why it was accredited to him as righteousness.

Furthermore, Joshua and Caleb had the same "indwelling sin" as the other 603,498 men over twenty years old that died in the wilderness. That entire generation witnessed the same miracles, ate the same manna, saw the same cloud and pillar of fire, but two men out of that entire generation entered into the promised land - because "they mixed what they heard with faith."

"Indwelling sin" was not the cause for God's judgment upon their generation. God called out their "unbelief" as sinful because He had provided every opportunity for them to have faith.

These are some of my own thoughts about your question. I realize we have all been corrupted by "indwelling sin", but I do not believe that "indwelling sin" prevents us from hearing the word of truth and believing.

Another thought comes to mind, regarding our responsibility for the sinfulness of our condition. Paul taught that we participated in our own enslavement. We "offered our members as instruments of sin unto slavery." We are not entirely passive victims in our total depravity. No, we were willing participants.

It is a mystery that not all men yield to sin to the same degree. These men are held out as our godly examples that we are to imitate. And it was "their faith" that enabled them to overcome the same "indwelling sin" that we all have to deal with.

I hope these thoughts offer some benefit for this topic. My present understanding of the scriptures is that God regards unbelief as evil, not an inability.

mak

Thx Mak””

I really enjoying this thread. Thanks for starting it.

Jesus says in John 3 that men will not come to the light because they love the darkness. The "inability" that the NT speaks of for the man of the flesh is one of desire or love ( which is spirit) more than incapacity. You will not do that which you hate and you will do that which you love most. That is why new birth is so essential. It is the nature of the sinful nature to hate the things of God. The new nature loves and desires the things of God. It is an inability of nature not an inability to hear or see or understand in the intellectual sense or to say yes with the mouth. The old nature is at natural enmity with God.

As to the saints of the OT, a circumcised heart is the description Paul gave of those who are "true Israel" for not all Israel is Israel. And that heart was not circumcised by human hands. So it is simple enough to conclude that God circumcised the OT saints' hearts.

One could draw some pretty unbiblical conclusions from mak's post on 'indwelling sin'.

What Mak seems to minimize and it does really cause me to question...Mak says "indwelling sin didn't stop" such and such a person.
But...what made the change? I hear only crickets. Its as if the person just 'obeyed God' without God's aid.

So, when God does aid the sinner in coming to faith, is it simply a happenstance, or maybe an unnecessary encounter? Because if man is able to fix himself along the way...since his own sin doesn't get in the way and God is definitely not to be mentioned as the causal agent, why should we not all become Pelagians...deny sinful human nature altogether and think like Finney, we hear the right words, believe the right doctrines and poof we change our minds and we are saved.

It can be easily construed that the new birth is just a human-willed decision away. The real problem is not indwelling sin, its just bad surroundings, bad doctrines, bad parents, bad religion...because we are the answer to our own demise.

So, while Mak is right about human accountability and sin-guilt...he consciously leaves God's Spirit, God's election, God's interventions, God's providences and God's divine plans completely out of the picture.

It's as if I am listening to a cult...a Mormon telling me how to know God, not sin, serve God and yet leave God's Spirit and his workings totally out of the message.

Now Marvin,

"So, while Mak is right about human accountability and sin-guilt...he consciously leaves God's Spirit, God's election, God's interventions, God's providences and God's divine plans completely out of the picture."

Please know that I did not leave out what is innately understood. All those who obtained the witness that they pleased God did so by faith. We KNOW that faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.

None of those who are mentioned in Hebrews 11 could believe except that God had made Himself known. That is so foundational that I assumed it is understood. God called them, He spoke to them, He commanded them, and they "believed" unto righteousness.

My focus was upon how all of these believed having the same sin nature that you and I are born with. I have no issue that you believe they were all the elect. In fact Israel is called the "elect of God over and over again" and look at their history. God's election did not guarantee them righteousness. They were called and chosen, just very unfaithful.

That is why men are "broken off", not because of "indwelling sin", but because of unbelief. We are not to boast that we are standing, but to remember that we are standing by faith. It is wise to consider the kindness and severity of God. Severity to those who did not believe, but kindness to us provided that we continue in His kindness, otherwise we too shall suffer their fate.

And marvelously, those who were broken off because of unbelief can be grafted in again, as long as they do not persist in the same unbelief that caused them to be broken off in the first place.

Faith or unbelief is far more determinate than the "sinful nature" that is common to both the believer and unbeliever.

mak

It appears that according to our brother and sister "Mak" and those very sincere and many that hold the view that those who have faith determine their election into new birth and the family of God. Seems upside down just a little bit.

I presume everyone agrees that faith is a gift of the Spirit ( Galatians 5: 22) and that not all have faith. Peter addresses those who are in Christ as those who have "received" a similar faith as his own. ! Peter says that we have been chosen unto sprinkling with blood and obedience to Jesus. If Jesus commands us to believe it would seem that election preceded that obedience. It does not conversely suggest that we have been chosen because of our obedience to believe in God and His Son whom He sent.

I recognize these arguments are not new. I just don't understand how they are ignored. I'm not being argumentative or dismissive of other opinions. I am so thrilled for all who have believed and truly wish all were so. Truly! Like brother Marvin essentially said, we long for all to have true faith and explain the few who do by the mercy of God.

At the end of the day, we preach Christ, a pleasing aroma to the Father which means whether all or a few are saved, our preaching is a victory because the Father is well pleased by the exaltation of His dear and beloved Son. Make the supremacy of Christ your aim in evangelism, worship, justification, sanctification and glorification. Praising Him for the glory of His grace in Jesus Christ!

//If Jesus commands us to believe it would seem that election preceded that obedience//

Why?

Truly, these times of ignorance God overlooked, but now commands **all** men everywhere to repent,
Acts 17:30

Are you saying God calls all men to repent but only enables some to do so?

Again, a logical absurdity.

I doubt that any of us would deny that God's decisions are "at times" based upon how men respond. God Himself declares that He is willing to change His mind from the destruction He has planned and instead give blessing and peace, if men will hear his words, humble their hearts, turn from their ungodliness and walk in His ways. And most certainly it is His grace to even give men this opportunity, but since He Himself has consistently acted this way, it should not trouble anyone that there are those who believe men's response determines God's response at times.

There are too many passages in scripture where this principle is so clearly stated that it leaves no doubt that God is willing to reconsider what He has declared and will indeed withhold either good or bad based upon the response of men.

Jeremiah 18 is one such passage where the Lord affirms His right to change His mind about whether a vessel will be unto one purpose or another and explains that this principle is true for any nation or kingdom.

Then the word of the Lord came to me, saying: 6 "O house of Israel, can I not do with you as this potter?” says the Lord. "Look, as the clay is in the potter’s hand, so are you in My hand, O house of Israel! 7 The instant I speak concerning a nation and concerning a kingdom, to pluck up, to pull down, and to destroy it, 8 if that nation against whom I have spoken turns from its evil, I will relent of the disaster that I thought to bring upon it. 9 And the instant I speak concerning a nation and concerning a kingdom, to build and to plant it, 10 if it does evil in My sight so that it does not obey My voice, then I will relent concerning the good with which I said I would benefit it.
11 "Now therefore, speak to the men of Judah and to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, saying, ‘Thus says the Lord: "Behold, I am fashioning a disaster and devising a plan against you. Return now every one from his evil way, and make your ways and your doings good.

Some of the sincere people who believe that men's response to God's word will determine their fate with God appear to have been biblical writers.

It was while reading the bible that I became aware of this principle.

mak