A Cure for Salvation or a Tulip that withers [Archive]

View Full Version : A Cure for Salvation or a Tulip that withers

GordonSlocum

5th October 2006, 08:18 AM

The Biblical View

C- Conditional salvation (believing faith in God's Grace - Condition is man must believe in God Work not mans work - Faith is not a work and is not a special gift either - faith is simply trusting it facts and accepting them or rejecting them)

U- Unlimited Atonement(For God so loved the World) John 8:12; John 12:46; John 1:4,7; John 12:3233,47; Romans 5:18; I Tim. 2:6; I Tim. 4:10; Heb. 2:9; II Peter 3:9I John 2:2 - God cannot do anything that is unfair or unreasonable. If God is holy and He is what he says can not be contradicted and must be understood and interpreted in the truth of His Holiness. God’s desire that all be saved is reasonable, but to say God planned the damnation of the many is un-reasonable against God’s Holiness. To Make God be the author of forced damnation is to make God a liar - I Peter 3:9. God can not lie. Heb 6:18

R- Resistible Grace(Some believe when they hear other refuse to believe)

E - Eternal Security(Jesus said He would not lose any who the Father gives Him which are all that believe)

D- Delivered from being Dead in Trespasses and sin (not eradicated image of God) John 8:12; John 12:46; John 1:4,7; John 12:3233,47; Romans 5:18; I Tim. 2:6; I Tim. 4:10; Heb. 2:9; II Peter 3:9I John 2:2 - The Gospel is the light of the world it is the light men need to believe in God’s work not his own or others. Death is separation not eradication and cessation.

T -Totally
U -Unscriptural and
L- Lost
I - In
P - Philosophical Circular Reasoning
It is fare to say that all camps can claim a believer is an Elect Believer. This is not the issue at all. The issue is How - not that we are.
The Biblical view is that God is not a liar and can not violate His holiness by contradicting His purpose to save the world based on the condition of faith. The “Totally Unscriptural and Lost in Philosophical Circular Reasoning” view is the moving away from a compassionate, loving, just, desiring to save all God to a convenient None Evangelistic Man up stairs who lies against His Character.
For God so Loved the world. How can any one in their right mind speak against God’s love for all mankind is beyond me. But they do and they do it in the mane of God.
I humbly bow before my God and Savior, acknowledging my sinfulness and dependence on Him and I thank God for the Jesus my savior and that God did not abandon me or anyone to hell freely giving me the opportunity to trust in Him.

TwinCrier

5th October 2006, 08:26 AM

Then plant roses:
Redeemed on condition of faith {For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God Eph 2:8}
Open to all {For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour; Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.
1 Tim 2:3-4} {And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for our's only, but also for the sins of the whole world. 1 John 2:2}
Separated by sin {But your iniquities have separated between you and your God, and your sins have hid his face from you, that he will not hear. Isaiah 59:2}
Elect to good works {For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them. Eph 2:10}
Sealed by the Spirit {For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death. For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh: Rom 8:2-3}

JacobHall86

5th October 2006, 09:27 AM

Its probably not good that half of your layout isnt in support of your arguement, but against Calvinism. Thats the sign of a weak arguement and its also a Logical Fallacy.

GordonSlocum

5th October 2006, 09:36 AM

GordonSlocum

5th October 2006, 09:40 AM

Its probably not good that half of your layout isnt in support of your arguement, but against Calvinism. Thats the sign of a weak arguement and its also a Logical Fallacy.

Hi Jacob, good try but the buckET you think out of is full of holes. It is Wholly full of holes.

Love you anyway.

God Bless

Matthan

5th October 2006, 09:56 AM

Gordon, as usual another great post. Oh, and TC, I will be out planting some ROSES this afternoon. Thanks for that wonderful post, too.

Matthan

JPPT1974

5th October 2006, 01:15 PM

You are very inspirational Gordon
God bless you
Salvation will never, ever, wither at all!

mlqurgw

5th October 2006, 02:04 PM

The Biblical View

C- Conditional salvation (believing faith in God's Grace - Condition is man must believe in God Work not mans work - Faith is not a work and is not a special gift either - faith is simply trusting it facts and accepting them or rejecting them)

U- Unlimited Atonement(For God so loved the World) John 8:12; John 12:46; John 1:4,7; John 12:3233,47; Romans 5:18; I Tim. 2:6; I Tim. 4:10; Heb. 2:9; II Peter 3:9I John 2:2 - God cannot do anything that is unfair or unreasonable. If God is holy and He is what he says can not be contradicted and must be understood and interpreted in the truth of His Holiness. God’s desire that all be saved is reasonable, but to say God planned the damnation of the many is un-reasonable against God’s Holiness. To Make God be the author of forced damnation is to make God a liar - I Peter 3:9. God can not lie. Heb 6:18

R- Resistible Grace(Some believe when they hear other refuse to believe)

E - Eternal Security(Jesus said He would not lose any who the Father gives Him which are all that believe)

D- Delivered from being Dead in Trespasses and sin (not eradicated image of God) John 8:12; John 12:46; John 1:4,7; John 12:3233,47; Romans 5:18; I Tim. 2:6; I Tim. 4:10; Heb. 2:9; II Peter 3:9I John 2:2 - The Gospel is the light of the world it is the light men need to believe in God’s work not his own or others. Death is separation not eradication and cessation.

T -Totally
U -Unscriptural and
L- Lost
I - In
P - Philosophical Circular Reasoning
It is fare to say that all camps can claim a believer is an Elect Believer. This is not the issue at all. The issue is How - not that we are.
The Biblical view is that God is not a liar and can not violate His holiness by contradicting His purpose to save the world based on the condition of faith. The “Totally Unscriptural and Lost in Philosophical Circular Reasoning” view is the moving away from a compassionate, loving, just, desiring to save all God to a convenient None Evangelistic Man up stairs who lies against His Character.
For God so Loved the world. How can any one in their right mind speak against God’s love for all mankind is beyond me. But they do and they do it in the mane of God.
I humbly bow before my God and Savior, acknowledging my sinfulness and dependence on Him and I thank God for the Jesus my savior and that God did not abandon me or anyone to hell freely giving me the opportunity to trust in Him.The problem with cures is that they usually have severe side effects. . . . . Your cure gives man a reason to boast and he will if he has a reason to.

holdon

5th October 2006, 10:43 PM

The problem with cures is that they usually have severe side effects. . . . Your cure gives man a reason to boast and he will if he has a reason to.

Where is the pride in believing God?

Matthan

5th October 2006, 11:30 PM

The problem with cures is that they usually have severe side effects. . . . . Your cure gives man a reason to boast and he will if he has a reason to.
How on earth did you come up with that one????? Where does Gordon even intimate "pride". Your post appears to be nothing more than a red herring that serves only to sidetrack a good OP.

Matthan

JacobHall86

5th October 2006, 11:31 PM

Good OP? its built on a strawman.

holdon

5th October 2006, 11:34 PM

Good OP? its built on a strawman.

If you could perhaps explain why you think it is a strawman or what the strawman is, we could have a better discussion.

JacobHall86

5th October 2006, 11:35 PM

He misrepresents what the Calvinistic Doctrine is to fit something that is easier to defeat.

holdon

5th October 2006, 11:39 PM

He misrepresents what the Calvinistic Doctrine is to fit something that is easier to defeat.

I didn't see the mention of Calvinism or Calvinistic Doctrine in his post, so how can he have been misrepresenting it?

JacobHall86

5th October 2006, 11:43 PM

Tulip.

holdon

5th October 2006, 11:47 PM

Tulip.

Oh, I see. But the acronym TULIP may also stand for other things than you think....

JacobHall86

5th October 2006, 11:48 PM

Dont yank my chain, you and I both know what he was talking about.

homebound1

6th October 2006, 02:04 AM

Thank you for sharing! :groupray:

Joanne
Phil. 4:13 :angel:

fratz

6th October 2006, 03:04 AM

C- Conditional salvation (believing faith in God's Grace - Condition is man must believe in God Work not mans work - Faith is not a work and is not a special gift either - faith is simply trusting it facts and accepting them or rejecting them)

Then plant roses:
Redeemed on condition of faith {For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God Eph 2:8}

is it just me or is there some contradiction there?

CooL_Genesis

6th October 2006, 06:48 AM

holdon

6th October 2006, 09:09 AM

How can faith not be a gift from God when our very lives and everything that is good in them are gifts or blessings of some sort?

Romans 12:3
For I say, through the grace given unto me, to every man that is among you, not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think; but to think soberly, according as God hath dealt to every man the measure of faith.

Faith is not of myself, therefore I can not boast in it. Paul was speaking to his brothers in Christ in this passage and acknowledges that even our faith has been given to us. Now, are we given this after we're saved? I don't know. I don't remember having much faith before I was saved by the Lord. The measure of faith that God gives has to do with the gifts. Each member of the body has one or more gifts. See how the measure of faith is linked to the giftedness in 12:6. Compare also similar teaching in 1 Cor 12:11 and Eph. 4:7.

This has nothing to do with the faculty of believing that all humans possess, like speaking or thinking.
To believe God everyone can do. If one does, he is saved.
Once he is saved he may aspire to the gifts of the Holy Spirit that He freely gives.

What's going to bring people to Christ? Men's doctrines (Calvanism, Arminianism, yada, yada) or the Love that Jesus showed the world through His walk and sacrifice? My hope is for the latter! Absolutely!

Here's an idea! Spend less time debating the things which man can not understand, because we are not God and His ways are not our ways, and more time loving God, loving thy neighbor and sharing the good news of Jesus Christ! :) Win/Win situation there! I agree that debating what we don't understand is futile. But we should observe what is explained in His Word. That's why I wanted to correct your point on Romans 12:3. The context is abundantly clear that this is not about "faith unto salvation", but about the gifts.

CooL_Genesis

7th October 2006, 08:53 AM

Thanks, holdon. I understand what the context was talking about.

My point is that ALL good things are a gift from God. Even the call from the Lord to salvation I consider a gift. If He hadn't of called me and showed me how desperately I needed Him, I would've never sought for His mercy on my soul. If He hadn't placed the need for Him in my spirit, I would've never cried out to Him for salvation. Do you see what I mean?

If I'm going to say, as Paul does, that no man (including myself) seeks God... then my search for Him and my calling out to Him had to be initiated by Him. Therefore, that yearning, that faith that He's indeed in control of everything, has to be from Him and not of myself.

Before I loved Jesus, He first loved me.

In peace and grace,

-Genesis

holdon

7th October 2006, 09:47 AM

Thanks, holdon. I understand what the context was talking about.

My point is that ALL good things are a gift from God. Even the call from the Lord to salvation I consider a gift. If He hadn't of called me and showed me how desperately I needed Him, I would've never sought for His mercy on my soul. If He hadn't placed the need for Him in my spirit, I would've never cried out to Him for salvation. Do you see what I mean? That's perfectly fine.

If I'm going to say, as Paul does, that no man (including myself) seeks God... then my search for Him and my calling out to Him had to be initiated by Him. Therefore, that yearning, that faith that He's indeed in control of everything, has to be from Him and not of myself. How do you know it is from Him? Can Man not easily be deluded? I am not saying that what you experience isn't from Him. But we know of a lot of people who say that they had this or that (fill in the blank) from God.

Before I loved Jesus, He first loved me.

Of course.

DeaconDean

7th October 2006, 11:28 PM

The Biblical View

C- Conditional salvation (believing faith in God's Grace - Condition is man must believe in God Work not mans work - Faith is not a work and is not a special gift either - faith is simply trusting it facts and accepting them or rejecting them)

From J.W.Hendryx:

"We confess with the Bible that our regeneration or new birth in Christ is monergistic (a work of God alone) and not synergistic (i.e. a cooperation of man and God in regeneration). Thus our faith in Christ arises out of a supernatural work of the Holy Spirit to change and soften our natural hostile disposition toward God. We likewise affirm that only by upholding monergistic regeneration do we faithfullly herald the biblical doctrine of 'Sola Gratia', or salvation by grace alone. All other schemes in which unregenerate man either takes the initiative or cooperates to be regenerated (by a faith produced or drawn from their native ability), should be considered synergistic. Some may be unhappy with being called a 'synergist' because it implies that they believe man and God work together toward salvation which clearly is a form of semi-pelagianism. So to defend themselves many synergists may respond as follows:
"Why do you call our belief that faith precedes regeneration synergistic? How can this be, unless faith is understood to be a work? Faith is not a meritorious work, by definition. In essence, the two are mutually exclusive. Accepting a gift is not a work, therefore it can't be considered synergism. If salvation is by faith, then works are nowhere to be found in the process. Again, to argue that faith precedes regeneration is synergistic would only be valid if faith = works."I might respond to this line of reasoning by saying something like the following:

"You are correct that the Bible teaches that faith is not a work, but we make it into a work as soon as we view it as something we can autonomously come up with, apart from any work of the Holy Spirit. Those who believe we can, from our own resources, change our naturally unregenerate hardened hearts in some way that is independent of God are promoting rank Pelagianism. Ask yourself, in light of Scripture, can you believe the gospel apart from ANY work of the Holy Spirit? (see 1 Thes 1:4,5). God commands us to come to Him but unregenerate man is naturally faithless. The reason for this is that he is by nature unspiritual (i.e. w/o the Holy Spirit). We cannot grasp spiritual truth without the Holy Spirit. To claim we might do so would be a contradiction, for spirituality is a condition of spiritual understanding. In 1 Cor 2:12 Paul affrims this by writing, "We have not received the spirit of the world but the Spirit who is from God, that we may understand what God has freely given us." ( i.e. the gospel). That is why through the prophet Jeremiah, God makes the promise, "I will heal your faithlessness" (Jer 3:22). With this in mind do you think we can heal our own faithlessness?
The question we need to be asking ourselves is, "what makes us to differ from other men who do not believe?" ... the grace of God or the will of man? If we say "the will of man" it is a boast and therefore not the kind of faith that is contrasted with works in the Bible. For Eph 2:8,9 speaks of faith that is the gift of God, a faith which leaves no room for boasting. True faith is seen as God's merciful gift which then looks away from its own resources and looks unto Christ for all spiritual blessings, including the very ability to believe. This is utterly distasteful to the natural man, not to mention humbling. And as Spurgeon said, "...no one natually submits to the humbling terms of the gospel". Elsewhere to strengthen this point Spurgeon said,
"...did you ever meet a Christian man who said, "I came to Christ without the power of the Spirit?" If you ever did meet such a man, you need have no hesitation in saying, "My dear sir, I quite believe it-and I believe you went away again without the power of the Spirit, and that you know nothing about the matter, and are in the gall of bitterness and the bond of iniquity."In the synergists understanding, what ultimately makes us to differ from unbelievers is the will of man, not the grace of God. For, in that system, God has given all men equal grace ('grace' meaning nothing more than something freely offered to them), so God's blessing hinges upon a condition we meet, our action, our wisdom, our spiritual sensitivity. But it was for this very reason God sent His Son, to do for us what we could not do for ourselves, (that is, including providing us with the spiritual resources to meet God's demand of faith and repentance.)
What makes men to differ to the synergist, therefore, is not grace, for, to them, all have grace, so the difference is how one man uses that grace better than another. Grace no longer, therefore, has anything to do with it, for ultimately it depends on a fallen person creating a right thought or affection about Christ thus believing in our ability to believe in Him. That our moral inability to exercise faith, due to a corruption of nature, does not itself need to be redeemed. Why, then, do some believe but not others? In answer to this most synergists say "because some believed" ... but notice that we did not ask what they did, but why they did it.
In John 10 Jesus said some do not believe BECAUSE they are not My sheep, and "My sheep hear my voice". Who they are in essence, therefore, precedes how they respond. Jesus explains this in detail when he says that Spirit gives birth to spirit but flesh gives birth to flesh...for this reason I said that no man can come to me UNLESS God grants it (John 6:63, 65). To believe in Christ God must grant it, and further, the Bible says ALL to whom God grants it, will believe (John 6:37).
It is true that the Bible contrasts faith and works, but biblical faith is never seen as something we, in our unregenerate condition, had to autonomously (apart form the Holy Spirit) contribute. Can the synergist thank God for his faith? How? Consider this prayer, "God I thank you for your salvation, except for my faith, the one thing I exercised on my own." Or consider this prayer, "Thank you Lord I am not like other men who do not have faith. While you extended grace to all men, some did not make use of it, BUT I DID." Such boasting, whether unconsciously or not is the result of believing that what makes you to differ from others is not God's grace but your faith. But the work of Christ redeems us unto faith, not on the condition of faith.
In the synergists' system, all men have grace, but only some have faith, yet because that faith does not comes from God's gift (since not all men have faith), is therefore, something we produce naturally on our own, apart from the Holy Spirit. That is why, after the Rich Young Ruler when away sad when called to repent and follow Jesus, the Lord answered his disciples' question "who then can be saved" with "what is impossible with man is possible with God."
Most of you who visit this site are convinced that the Bible teaches that salvation is by the grace of Jesus Christ alone, that is, that man and God do not cooperate in salvation. Most would further affirm that faith is not produced by our unregenerated human nature but comes about as the result of a supernatural work of the Holy Spirit who turns our heart of stone to a heart of flesh, opens our spiritually blind eyes and unplugs our deaf ears to the gospel. We believe the gospel can only be heard by those God has spiritually granted to hear it (John 6:63, 65). This is not only what the Bible teaches from beginning to end, but this safeguards the reality that all glory goes to God for our salvation.
We affirm that our blindness and deafness to the gospel cannot be changed by mere human persuasion, (just as light itself does not make a blind man see) but rather it is by God doing a work of grace in our heart to change our naturally hostile disposition to one of love for Christ. We believe the Bible teaches this because, without the Holy Spirit, the natural man does not understand spiritual things (1 Cor 2:14) but thinks of them as foolish. He naturally loves darkness and hates the light and will not come into the light (John 3:19, 20) The human will as a 'slave to sin' does not, therefore, by liberty obtain saving grace, but by saving grace obtains liberty.
I would like to leave you with the following bit of the Hebrew Scripture: Sometimes in the Old Testament and the New, God reveals behind the scenes how He enabled particular persons to obey his Word when they were called to repent: In 2 Chronicles chapter 30 when couriers with a message of repentance passed from city to city through the country of Ephraim and Manasseh, and as far as Zebulun, those who heard laughed them to scorn and mocked them when they were called to repent,
"Nevertheless [the Bible says] some men of Asher, Manasseh and Zebulun humbled themselves and came to Jerusalem. The hand of God was also on Judah to give them one heart to do what the king and the princes commanded by the word of the LORD." (2 Chronicles 30:11-12)The text says some resisted the call, but all those tribes which the hand of God gave a heart to obey the Word, repented.
- J.W. Hendryx

Without the Holy Spirit working within the sinner to reprove them of sin, how can the sinner have faith first?

"And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment:"-John 16:8

He can't. A man cannot have saving faith unless he/she be regenerated by the Spirit first:

"And Jesus said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That ye which have followed me, in the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel." -Matt. 19:28

"Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God...Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God...Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again." -John 3:3,5,7

"Not by works of righteousness which we have done, [I]but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;" Titus 3:5

I do not believe faith preceeds regeneration. It is the Holy Spirit which works in us to convict of sin, and it is the Holy Spirit which regenerates us and changes us so that we can believe.

God Bless

Till all are one.

holdon

8th October 2006, 12:07 AM

Most would further affirm that faith is not produced by our unregenerated human nature but comes about as the result of a supernatural work of the Holy Spirit who turns our heart of stone to a heart of flesh, opens our spiritually blind eyes and unplugs our deaf ears to the gospel.

I don't know how you are able to measure that "most" agree with you.

I for sure don't. Hearing comes before faith. See Romans 10:17.

All you're doing is raising the colossal strawman that because man is dead in trespasses and sins, he cannot hear unless faith be given to him. It's all nonsense. Paul says in that same epistle that dead can hear. Eph 5:14.
So, this theology is fundamentally wrong.
Go preach then that people should believe and repent if it is given to them. Because that is the Calvinistic approach.
Not so God's word:

"God therefore, having overlooked the times of ignorance, now enjoins men that they shall all everywhere repent"

DeaconDean

8th October 2006, 12:43 AM

I don't know how you are able to measure that "most" agree with you.

I for sure don't. Hearing comes before faith. See Romans 10:17.

All you're doing is raising the colossal strawman that because man is dead in trespasses and sins, he cannot hear unless faith be given to him. It's all nonsense. Paul says in that same epistle that dead can hear. Eph 5:14.
So, this theology is fundamentally wrong.
Go preach then that people should believe and repent if it is given to them. Because that is the Calvinistic approach.
Not so God's word:

"God therefore, having overlooked the times of ignorance, now enjoins men that they shall all everywhere repent"

In the first place, that quote wasn't mine it was Mr. Hendryx's. And in the second place, How can one hear unless the Spirit opens the ears?

If I follow your line of thought, you heard the message being preached, you decided to believe, and then the Spirit worked in you to bring you to faith in Him.

You see, I see it the other way around. I heard the message being preached, the Spirit worked in me to convict me of my sins, then the Spirit worked in me to regenerate me so I could believe.

I know there is a movement on this area of the forums to support that "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:" -Eph. 2:8 isn't really saying that Faith is a gift of God. But the fact is Eph. 2:8 says it is.

"And in them is fulfilled the prophecy of Esaias, which saith, By hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and shall not perceive: For this people's heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them. But blessed are your eyes, for they see: and your ears, for they hear." -Matt. 13:14-16

The fact still remains, without the Holy Spirit working in the sinner to convict, reprove, open the deaf ears, and regenerate, man in and of himself, cannot do anything. Man does not even have the faith it calls for to believe unless the Spirit gives it. Seems to me I remember a piece of scripture that says:

"Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith;" -Heb. 12:2

I had no faith before Him. If this scripture is correct, then Jesus is the author of our faith, not us!

U- Unlimited Atonement(For God so loved the World) John 8:12; John 12:46; John 1:4,7; John 12:3233,47; Romans 5:18; I Tim. 2:6; I Tim. 4:10; Heb. 2:9; II Peter 3:9I John 2:2 - God cannot do anything that is unfair or unreasonable. If God is holy and He is what he says can not be contradicted and must be understood and interpreted in the truth of His Holiness. God’s desire that all be saved is reasonable, but to say God planned the damnation of the many is un-reasonable against God’s Holiness. To Make God be the author of forced damnation is to make God a liar - I Peter 3:9. God can not lie. Heb 6:18

Seems to me, I remember reading somewhere:

"Even as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many."-Matt. 20:28, Mk. 10:45

I notice that here it does not say: "Even as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for all."

God Bless

Till all are one.

mlqurgw

8th October 2006, 01:32 AM

DeaconDean

8th October 2006, 02:44 AM

R- Resistible Grace(Some believe when they hear other refuse to believe)

Seems to me, I read somewhere in the scriptures:

"For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God." -Rom. 8:14

I don't see where it says: "For as all are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God."

I also remember reading:

"And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God." -1 Cor. 6:11

It does not say: "And such were all of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God."

It is fare to say that all camps can claim a believer is an Elect Believer. This is not the issue at all. The issue is How - not that we are.

To some, they have to have every little detail spelled out to them. For me, it is simple that the reason why is:

"...according to the good pleasure of his will," -Eph. 1:5

The Biblical view is that God is not a liar and can not violate His holiness by contradicting His purpose to save the world based on the condition of faith. The “Totally Unscriptural and Lost in Philosophical Circular Reasoning” view is the moving away from a compassionate, loving, just, desiring to save all God to a convenient None Evangelistic Man up stairs who lies against His Character.
For God so Loved the world. How can any one in their right mind speak against God’s love for all mankind is beyond me. But they do and they do it in the mane of God.

Show me where in the Bible, Pharoah ever, even after seeing the hand of God work, came to saving faith. Show me where in the scriptures that Saul came to saving faith. Show me where in the Bible that Nebuchadnezzar ever came to saving faith. Show me where the rich man came to saving faith. Show me where Judas Iscariot came to faith.

My answer is, God is soveriegn in ALL that He does. If He were to kill me right now, dead on the spot, I could not raise an argument against it because He is soveriegn and if He did kill me, then He would righteous in His doing so.

Whereas I place God rightfully on His throne, and agree with scripture:

"Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth." -Rom. 9:18

And how do you seek to take God off His thone by denying His soveriegnty?

How can any one in their right mind speak against God’s love for all mankind is beyond me. But they do and they do it in the mane of God.

My Bible tells me:

"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? Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?" -Rom. 9:20-21

You say that when man resists God he has done so out of mans own "free-will." But scriptures say different. If God has created only one "vessels of wrath fitted to destruction:" and according to your theory they have resisted by mans own "free-will," then your theory falls to pieces, but if you are right, God does not reign on high on His throne.

It is true that God is not willing that any should perish (1 Pet. 3:9), that is why the gospel is commanded to preached everywhere. To reach the elect. It is also a fact that sin will not send you to hell, sin will not send you to the lake of fire. Rejecting the Savior is what will ultimately send one to their doom. (John 3:36)

"For many are called, but few are chosen." -Matt. 22:14

Man left up to his own devices:

"There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God." -Rom. 3:11

Man is born wicked and in sin, so how can man seek God with his own "free-will?"

"Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me." -Psa. 51:5

You would have all to believe that Calvinists paint God as like some little kid sitting up in heaven with a big magnifiying glass burning whomever He choses, instead of being the soveriegn creator who is just and right in all that he does whether it is election or reprobation. Instead you want the world to see Him as a kindly grand-father type who gives nickels and dimes to the good and spanking the wicked with a pillow covered paddle when they are bad.

I want God sitting on that throne deciding who will and who won't come to Him. I want Jesus sitting up on the right hand of God as my author and finisher of my faith. I want the Holy Spirit as the working force in this world reproving the world of sin and opening the eyes and ears of believers. I want a God who sits up on high ruling as He sees fit. I want a God who does according to "his good pleasure." I want a God who has His "will done on earth as it is in heaven," and not left up to mans "free-will." My God is sovereign in all that He does.

Job 38-41 puts man in his proper place.

"Then the LORD answered Job out of the whirlwind, and said, Who is this that darkeneth counsel by words without knowledge? Gird up now thy loins like a man; for I will demand of thee, and answer thou me. Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding." -Job 38:1-4

"Moreover the LORD answered Job, and said, Shall he that contendeth with the Almighty instruct him? he that reproveth God, let him answer it. Then Job answered the LORD, and said, Behold, I am vile; what shall I answer thee? I will lay mine hand upon my mouth. Once have I spoken; but I will not answer: yea, twice; but I will proceed no further. Then answered the LORD unto Job out of the whirlwind, and said, Gird up thy loins now like a man: I will demand of thee, and declare thou unto me. Wilt thou also disannul my judgment? wilt thou condemn me, that thou mayest be righteous? Hast thou an arm like God? or canst thou thunder with a voice like him? Deck thyself now with majesty and excellency; and array thyself with glory and beauty. Cast abroad the rage of thy wrath: and behold every one that is proud, and abase him. Look on every one that is proud, and bring him low; and tread down the wicked in their place. Hide them in the dust together; and bind their faces in secret. Then will I also confess unto thee that thine own right hand can save thee." -Job 40:1-14

"Who hath prevented me, that I should repay him? whatsoever is under the whole heaven is mine." -Job 41:11

So please brother when I say I disagree with your theory, it is because I do not believe it holds up to scripture.

God Bless

Till all are one.

CooL_Genesis

8th October 2006, 08:29 AM

Wow... excellent post, Dean! :amen:

holdon

8th October 2006, 09:06 AM

In the first place, that quote wasn't mine it was Mr. Hendryx's. Mr. Hendryx said: "Most of you who visit this site are convinced, etc."??? And in the second place, How can one hear unless the Spirit opens the ears? Everyone can hear.

If I follow your line of thought, you heard the message being preached, you decided to believe, and then the Spirit worked in you to bring you to faith in Him. When I believed I received the Spirit. Not before. Eph 1:13

You see, I see it the other way around. I heard the message being preached I thought you couldn't hear? , the Spirit worked in me to convict me of my sins, then the Spirit worked in me to regenerate me so I could believe. The Spirit regenerates throught the Word. The Word is the living seed. It is planted by the Spirit, it is received by believing.

I know there is a movement on this area of the forums to support that "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:" -Eph. 2:8 isn't really saying that Faith is a gift of God. But the fact is Eph. 2:8 says it is.

"And in them is fulfilled the prophecy of Esaias, which saith, By hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and shall not perceive: For this people's heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them. But blessed are your eyes, for they see: and your ears, for they hear." -Matt. 13:14-16

So?? I fail to see your point. Some refuse. Therefore while hearing they don't understand. Others gladly receive the Seed of God. So, what is the difference? Their willingness to receive: the soil's condition.

The fact still remains, without the Holy Spirit working in the sinner to convict, reprove, open the deaf ears, and regenerate, man in and of himself, cannot do anything. So, why is God telling Man to do something? Believe. Repent. Man does not even have the faith it calls for to believe unless the Spirit gives it. Seems to me I remember a piece of scripture that says:

"Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith;" -Heb. 12:2

I had no faith before Him. If this scripture is correct, then Jesus is the author of our faith, not us! Of course you want to proof text with all the known arguments from Calvinism. But with that you don't understand what the verse says.

Seems to me, I remember reading somewhere:

"Even as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many."-Matt. 20:28, Mk. 10:45

I notice that here it does not say: "Even as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for all."

But 1 Tim 2:6 says so:
"the man Christ Jesus, who gave himself a ransom for (file:///C:/Documents%20and%20Settings/Willem%20Laptop/My%20Documents/Mijn%20stuff/darby/other%20version/bdbl/BDB/n_1ti.html#2:6) all"

Sorry, but the bible witnesses against you.

holdon

8th October 2006, 09:08 AM

Your assertion that dead men can hear is absurd nonsene. Paul does not teach it.Well, he does: Eph. 5:14. So, is Paul telling "absurd nonsense"?

TwinCrier

8th October 2006, 04:19 PM

Yall know that he doesn't mean physically dead but spiritually dead right? I'm as much of a biblical literalist as they come, and even I don't see that as literal.

8th October 2006, 05:14 PM

I’m glad to see so much interest in Calvinism [which usually leads to covenant theology], especially among Baptists, it’s a return to our roots in many ways. The forums and the internet in general is a buzz with “Calvinism vs. Arminianism” and this is largely as a reaction to the growth of Calvinistic doctrine among the brethren, and the receding front once held by dispensationalism.

Thanks folks. :clap:

holdon

8th October 2006, 06:43 PM

8th October 2006, 07:40 PM

Baptists? Nope. Anabaptists? Yup. The following is a clip from a paper I wrote.

History is written by the victors someone once said, and that is true when we deal with the history of the church, which leaves the historical record marred by attempts to vindicate or vilify. Those who call themselves “Baptists” have no founder in the sense the Lutherans have Martin Luther or the Reformed church has John Calvin. No, the Baptists seem to have sprung up in Puritan England during the early 1600’s, bringing with them theological ideas and concepts found throughout history and more importantly, the Bible.

Reformation
The period in history known as the Reformation, is a fascinating time where the church recaptured the Gospel proclamation, that salvation is by Grace through faith in Christ [Ephesians 2:8]. Erasmus, a Christian humanist, was a popular figure of the period that encouraged the study of the New Testament in the original Greek [opposed to the Latin translation], which laid the foundation for the Authorized King James version of the Bible. With a renewed spirit and Scripture as the final authority, discrepancies became apparent between the church of the New Testament and the church under papal Rome. Martin Luther outlined these discrepancies in his “Ninety-Five Thesis” he posted in Wittenberg Germany in 1517, sparking the Reformation of the church.

It was from this turbulent time the Anabaptists[1] (http://www.christianforums.com/#_ftn1) emerged.

The Reformation front in Switzerland was being lead by Ulrich Zwingli [1484-1531], who shared/or influenced Baptistic thinking concerning the Lord’s Supper[2] (http://www.christianforums.com/#_ftn2) and “the clarity of the word of God and the ability of the common person to understand it.”[3] (http://www.christianforums.com/#_ftn3) By reading the Greek New Testament compiled by Erasmus, Zwingli came to the Lord and strived to have a church built upon the word. The Anabaptists story begins in 1520 with a German Christian named Thomas Muntzer leading them. The movement was considered too radical and in many ways the modern Baptists, inclined to this so-called radical thinking, are the only true Reformers willing to return to New Testament teaching and not willing to hang onto Roman Catholic traditions. They spread and eventually the Swiss Anabaptists bunted heads with Zwingli over the City Council’s involvement in the church. Zwingli only wanted to make changes to the church the City Council would approve while the Anabaptists wanted a separation between the church and the state. There was also the issue over who was to be baptized. It’s important to keep in mind that Anabaptists are not Baptists in the modern sense of the name, Baptists share theological ideas, but Anabaptists and Baptists are not synonymous.

The Anabaptists remained outside of the mainstream Reformation but their contribution is invaluable. Five tenets can be identified and correspond to modern Baptist belief, those being: the central authority of the Bible, separation of church and state, freedom of conscience for religious belief, believers [credo] baptism and holiness of life. The mainstream Reformers such as Martin Luther, John Calvin and Ulrich Zwingli held on tightly to the medieval ideal of Christendom, keeping close ties to secular authority, believing enforcement of religious belief upon society [hence the people] was Biblical. The support of secular authority was seen as providential, Luther wanted both “corpus Christi/body of Christ” and “corpus Christianum/Christian society” which gave rise to the revival of Old Testament theocracy[4] (http://www.christianforums.com/#_ftn4) practice in place of New Testament ethics which are more difficult to enforce. This framework was inherited from the Roman Catholic Church where the “Christian” emperor ruled with a Bishop, governing the Christian state. Tertullian wrote a rhetorical question, “What does the Emperor have to do with the church?” While the persecution was going on in Europe they fled and the teaching spread to England where we find efforts to expel them from England in 1538.

England
Although it may sound like a common alias used by criminals, John Smyth began a separatist congregation in England in 1606. He was a graduate of Cambridge and a minister in the Anglican Church, who eventually laid the foundations of the Baptist church. Genuine in faith and true to his times, Smyth wanted reform of the church upon a Biblical model, a purified church in England. Along with Thomas Helwys, Smyth separated from the Anglican Church, but progress was slow. They taught the central authority of the Bible, that the church is made up of believers only and the church should be governed by believers. Smyth and Helwys fled with their congregation to Holland in 1608 to seek freedom from secular persecution where they came into contact with Mennonites[5] (http://www.christianforums.com/#_ftn5) and were convinced that believer’s were the only candidates for baptism. It was in 1609 we mark the birth of the modern Baptist church. Smyth and Helwys eventually parted ways, Smyth wanted to merge his congregation with the Mennonites, and Helwys headed back to England in 1612. His life was ended in 1616 for writing a book about freedom of the conscience.

It’s interesting to note that Baptists were more concerned with WHO was baptized then HOW they were baptized, emphasizing a church of believers, and not the mode in which one was baptized. The General Baptists founded by Helwys used sprinkling and were also Arminian in theology. It was the Particular Baptists that went to great lengths to stress baptism by immersion and were also Calvinist or Reformed in theology. [The first Calvinist Reformed Baptists can be found as early as 1616 see timeline: http://www.reformedreader.org/btimline.htm (http://www.reformedreader.org/btimline.htm%5D) ]

If you have a look at the Baptist confessions of faith, you'll notice most hold to the 5 points of calvinism.

http://www.reformedreader.org/history/list.htm

http://www.reformedreader.org/ccc/hbd.htm

[1] (http://www.christianforums.com/#_ftnref1) Anabaptist means rebaptizers for their insistence on baptizing only professed believers.

[2] (http://www.christianforums.com/#_ftnref2) Those partaking commemorate the death of Christ, but Christ is not present either physically or spiritually. Mystical views are rejected and this view is held by Anabaptist, Mennonite and Baptist churches.

[3] (http://www.christianforums.com/#_ftnref3) Moody Handbook of Theology, page 447 Paul Enns.

[4] (http://www.christianforums.com/#_ftnref4) “a political unit governed by a deity (or by officials thought to be divinely guided)” Dictionary.com

[5] (http://www.christianforums.com/#_ftnref5)The Mennonites took their name from Menno Simons a Dutch priest who converted to the Anabaptist faith.

holdon

8th October 2006, 08:53 PM

mlqurgw

8th October 2006, 09:45 PM

Yall know that he doesn't mean physically dead but spiritually dead right? I'm as much of a biblical literalist as they come, and even I don't see that as literal.Holden's argument fails if he admits to the passage speaking of spiritual death and he knows it. It is his preferred tactic to twist and distort in order to confuse. He has used it in every debate I have engaged him in and all others which I have read. By it he has actually undermined his own credibility and cannot be taken seriously.

holdon

8th October 2006, 09:57 PM

Holden's argument fails if he admits to the passage speaking of spiritual death and he knows it. Eph. doesn't speak about physical death. It's all about the spiritual state. So, is Eph. 5:14

"Wherefore he says, Wake up, thou that sleepest, and arise up from among the dead"It is his preferred tactic to twist and distort in order to confuse. He has used it in every debate I have engaged him in and all others which I have read. By it he has actually undermined his own credibility and cannot be taken seriously.

Now, if you could just refrain from personal attacks on this forum, perhaps we could have a meaningful discussion. I won't hold my breath though.

mlqurgw

8th October 2006, 10:06 PM

Eph. doesn't speak about physical death. It's all about the spiritual state. So, is Eph. 5:14

"Wherefore he says, Wake up, thou that sleepest, and arise up from among the dead"

Now, if you could just refrain from personal attacks on this forum, perhaps we could have a meaningful discussion. I won't hold my breath though.
A meaningful discussion with you is quite impossible. I said nothing that can't be eaisily shown from a search of your posts.

holdon

8th October 2006, 10:10 PM

I said nothing that can't be eaisily shown from a search of your posts.

Then show it! Show where I "twist and distort in order to confuse". If you make accusations, at least back them up with facts.

mlqurgw

8th October 2006, 10:12 PM

Then show it! Show where I "twist and distort in order to confuse". If you make accusations, at least back them up with facts.One need only read this thread to see it. I am done.

holdon

8th October 2006, 10:14 PM

One need only read this thread to see it. I am done.

Oh where precisely? Come on. Show it.

fratz

8th October 2006, 10:35 PM

i'd like to see where holdon supposedly twisted things around too. i don't see it. by the way nice crowd in here. not. is everyone on this website like this? i hope not.

8th October 2006, 10:39 PM

i'd like to see where holdon supposedly twisted things around too. i don't see it. by the way nice crowd in here. not. is everyone on this website like this? i hope not.

You're in here as well fratz. :doh:

fratz

8th October 2006, 10:45 PM

looking for friendly folk. am i gonna get that lucky?

mlqurgw

8th October 2006, 10:50 PM

looking for friendly folk. am i gonna get that lucky?Holden and I have history. You will find that most in here are very friendly but our differences do sometimes cause us to be harsh. I am probably the meanest of the bunch so ...

DeaconDean

8th October 2006, 11:43 PM

Everyone can hear...The Spirit regenerates throught the Word. The Word is the living seed. It is planted by the Spirit, it is received by believing...But 1 Tim 2:6 says so:
"the man Christ Jesus, who gave himself a ransom for (file:///C:/Documents%20and%20Settings/Willem%20Laptop/My%20Documents/Mijn%20stuff/darby/other%20version/bdbl/BDB/n_1ti.html#2:6) all"

Sorry, but the bible witnesses against you.

holdon, I'm gonna take the time to show you something to which you evidently don't know or might have overlooked. In each and every epistle, or letter that Paul wrote, he is addressing Christians who have already had their ears and eyes opened.

To prove that Paul was addressing Christians only read this:

Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle, separated unto the gospel of God, 2 (Which he had promised afore by his prophets in the holy scriptures,) 3 Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh; 4 And declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead: 5 By whom we have received grace and apostleship, for obedience to the faith among all nations, for his name: 6 Among whom are ye also the called of Jesus Christ: 7 To all that be in Rome, beloved of God, called to be saints: Grace to you and peace from God our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ. –Rom. 1:1-7

Paul, called to be an apostle of Jesus Christ through the will of God, and Sosthenes our brother, 2 Unto the church of God which is at Corinth, to them that are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints, with all that in every place call upon the name of Jesus Christ our Lord, both theirs and ours: -1 Cor. 1:1-2

Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, and Timothy our brother, unto the church of God which is at Corinth, with all the saints which are in all Achaia: -2 Cor. 1:1

Paul, an apostle, (not of men, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ, and God the Father, who raised him from the dead 2 And all the brethren which are with me, unto the churches of Galatia: -Gal. 1:1-2

Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, to the saints which are at Ephesus, and to the faithful in Christ Jesus: -Eph. 1:1

Paul and Timotheus, the servants of Jesus Christ, to all the saints in Christ Jesus which are at Philippi, with the bishops and deacons: -Phil. 1:1

Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, and Timotheus our brother, 2 To the saints and faithful brethren in Christ which are at Colosse: Grace be unto you, and peace, from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ. –Col. 1:1-2

Paul, and Silvanus, and Timotheus, unto the church of the Thessalonians which is in God the Father and in the Lord Jesus Christ: Grace be unto you, and peace, from God our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ. -1 Thes. 1:1

Paul, and Silvanus, and Timotheus, unto the church of the Thessalonians in God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ: -2 Thes. 1:1

Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the commandment of God our Saviour, and Lord Jesus Christ, which is our hope; 2 Unto Timothy, my own son in the faith: -1 Tim. 1:1-2

Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, according to the promise of life which is in Christ Jesus, 2 To Timothy, my dearly beloved son: Grace, mercy, and peace, from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Lord. -2 Tim. 1:1-2

Paul, a servant of God, and an apostle of Jesus Christ, according to the faith of God's elect, and the acknowledging of the truth which is after godliness; 2 In hope of eternal life, which God, that cannot lie, promised before the world began; 3 But hath in due times manifested his word through preaching, which is committed unto me according to the commandment of God our Saviour; 4 To Titus, mine own son after the common faith: Grace, mercy, and peace, from God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ our Saviour. –Titus 1:1-4

Paul, a prisoner of Jesus Christ, and Timothy our brother, unto Philemon our dearly beloved, and fellowlabourer, 2 And to our beloved Apphia, and Archippus our fellowsoldier, and to the church in thy house: Philemon 1:1-2

With the exception of Timothy, and Titus, each epistle/letter was written to Christians or churches. Not the lost. How many times did we listen to our fathers rant and rave, and even threaten us when we were bad? Did we not let it go in one ear and out the other? We might have listened to our fathers but we did not hear them The same principle applies to the word of God. How many times must one go to church and listen to the message being preached before one submits? Ten? Twenty? A hundred? There is no answer for that. How can one hear what the word says unless the Spirit is working in them to convict of sin? They can't for one simple reason:

"But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned." -2 Cor. 2:14

So unless the Spirit is working in a person to convict and open the eyes and ears, they will not hear because they are "spiritually discerned." And regardless of what Paul said, Jesus Himself said:

"Even as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many." -Matt. 20:28

And Mark records the same words:

"For even the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many." -Mk. 10:45

So I'm sorry, but I prefer the Lords words. And Jesus said He came to give His life as a rasom for many, not all.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again, there is nothing in the New Testament that pertains to unbelievers except the message that they are lost in sin and need Jesus Christ as their Personal Savior. Each epistle of the New Testament was written for the Christian to help in our walk with the Lord, or to help us in our walk with our fellow Christian brothers and sisters.

Would Paul teach those who were lost to:

"...that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service." -Rom. 12:1

No, that message is for Christians.

So are we to believe that your "free-will" all of a sudden said Hum...I think I will seek after God. No I don't think so. Because before the Spirit works in man to reprove him of sin, man is carnally minded and the carnal mind cannot be subject to the law of God. (Rom. 8:6,8) If you have been accustomed to doing evil all your life, how can one all of a sudden change his ways?

"Can the Ethiopian change his skin, or the leopard his spots? then may ye also do good, that are accustomed to do evil." -Jer. 13:23

You can't. Period. My Bible tells me that the natural heart of man is:

"The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?" -Jer. 17:9

How can you say that you decided to believe without the Spirit working in you first to reprove you of sin? You can't in good consciousness. In mans unregenerate state he is:

"...have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God." -Rom. 10:3

Man in his unregenerate state is:

"There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God. They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one. Their throat is an open sepulchre; with their tongues they have used deceit; the poison of asps is under their lips: Whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness: Their feet are swift to shed blood: Destruction and misery are in their ways: And the way of peace have they not known: There is no fear of God before their eyes." -Rom .3:11-18

Man in his natural, unregenerate state is:

"...that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually." -Gen. 6:5

And I don't see where man is any better now than back in Noah's day.

There is nothing in man that was not tainted with sin from the fall. Not even mans "free-will." And to argue differently is to aline ones self with the Pelagan line of thought.

Pelagianism derives its name from Pelagius who lived in the 5th century A.D. and was a teacher in Rome, though he was British by birth. It is a heresy dealing with the nature of man. Pelagius, whose family name was Morgan, taught that people had the ability to fulfill the commands of God by exercising the freedom of human will apart from the grace of God. In other words, a person's free will is totally capable of choosing God and/or to do good or bad without the aid of Divine intervention. Pelagianism teaches that man's nature is basically good. Thus it denies original sin, the doctrine that we have inherited a sinful nature from Adam. He said that Adam only hurt himself when he fell and all of his descendents were not affected by Adam's sin. Pelagius taught that a person is born with the same purity and moral abilities as Adam was when he was first made by God. He taught that people can choose God by the exercise of their free will and rational thought. God's grace, then, is merely an aid to help individuals come to Him.

Or perhaps, you support the Semi-Pelagian line of thought:

Semi-Pelagianism is a weaker form of Pelagianism a heresy derived from from Pelagius who lived in the 5th century A.D. and was a teacher in Rome. Semi-Pelagianism (advocated by Cassian at Marseilles, 5th Century) did not deny original sin and its effects upon the human soul and will. But, it taught that God and man cooperate to achieve man's salvation. This cooperation is not by human effort as in keeping the law, but rather in the ability of a person to make a free will choice. The semi-Pelagian teaches that man can make the first move toward God by seeking God out of his own free will and that man can cooperate with God's grace even to the keeping of his faith through human effort. This would mean that God responds to the initial effort of person and that God's grace is not absolutely necessary to maintain faith. The problem is that this is no longer grace. Grace is the completely unmerited and freely given favor of God upon the sinner. But, if man is the one who first seeks God, then God is responding to the good effort of seeking him. This would mean that God is offering a proper response to the initial effort of man. This is not grace, but what is due the person who chooses to believe in God apart from God's initial effort.

This line of thought was condemed in AD 529 by the council of Orange. But it still hangs around in the teachings of Arminianism. And is also seen in the battle over:

Monergism: In theol., The doctrine that the Holy Spirit is the only efficient agent in regeneration - that the human will possesses no inclination to holiness until regenerated, and therefore cannot cooperate in regeneration. Monergism is when God conveys that power into the fallen soul whereby the person who is to be saved is enabled to receive the offer of redemption. It refers to the first step (regeneration) which has causal priority over, and gives rise to, the spiritual ability to comply with all the other aspects of the process of being united to Christ, (i.e., the ability to apprehend the Redeemer by a living faith, to repent of sin and to love God and the Mediator supremely) It does not refer to the whole process that it gives rise to (justification, sanctification), but only the granting of the spiritual capacity to comply with the terms of the covenant of grace.

and:

Synergism: "...the doctrine that there are two efficient agents in regeneration, namely the human will and the divine Spirit, which, in the strict sense of the term, cooperate. This theory accordingly holds that the soul has not lost in the fall all inclination toward holiness, nor all power to seek for it under the influence of ordinary motives."

And to tell you the truth, I see this line of thought being promoted more and more, day in and day out here on the forums. To which I reject in all that it teaches.

Regardless, regeneration preceeds faith, plain and simple. And it is the Holy Spirit that works in the unrepentant sinner to convict of sin, the regenerates them so that they can believe.

"And Jesus said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That ye which have followed me, in the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel." -Matt. 19:28

"Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;" -Titus 3:5

The Holy Spirit convicts first, then regenerates, then renews us. And it is only after repenting and asking for Jesus to save us and accepting Him as our personal Savior that the Holy Spirit indwells us.

"Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost." -Acts 2:38

So I'm sorry friend, but in my opinion, your interpretation of scripture is wrong. And that isn't my words or Calvins words, that...is what the Bible says. That...is what God says. And as you said to me:

Sorry, but the bible witnesses against you.

I'm sorry, but the Bible witnesses against you friend.

God Bless

Till all are one.

GordonSlocum

9th October 2006, 09:45 AM

holdon, I'm gonna take the time to show you something to which you evidently don't know or might have overlooked. In each and every epistle, or letter that Paul wrote, he is addressing Christians who have already had their ears and eyes opened.

(Most of the body of your post removed due to the size being to large and the post would could not be accepted because of oversize.)

To prove that Paul was addressing Christians only read this:

I'm sorry, but the Bible witnesses against you friend.

God Bless

Till all are one.

See Deacon's post to read all the endless passages used out of context to prove a point which only suggest that he is teaching false doctrine, and not willing to acknowledge the following clear passages

Deacon, Please Deacon, stop misleading everyone.

What does this verse say?

I Timothy 4:10. For it is for this we labor and strive, because we have fixed our hope on the living God, who is the Savior of all men, especially of believers.

Paul wrote to believers - not an issue - Believers like you need to know and be taught by the Bible not Calvin, or the TULIP Troops. I abjure you to cast all those false teaching away and turn to the Bible.

This verse also,

John 12:47. "If anyone hears My sayings and does not keep them, I do not judge him; for I did not come to judge the world, but to save the world.

How about this verse:

II Peter 2:1. But false prophets also arose among the people, just as there will also be false teachers among you, who will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the Master who bought them, bringing swift destruction upon themselves.

I know TULIP TROOPS just rip this verse out of the Bible - How convenient.

I John 2: 2. and He Himself is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for {those of} the whole world

Do you Calvinist- TULIP TROOPS - Fatalist - think that the word "world" here does not means all mankind ? Surely you are not going to twist this passage to mean something it does not say.

John 3:16. "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life. 17. "For God did not send the Son into the world to judge the world, but that the world might be saved through Him.

The message is to the whole world and "whosoever" in this world believes. The world is the intended total but only the whosoever are the ones saved out of the whole. :eek: :doh:

To take this verse and manipulate it to mean only the elect is to clearly deny what it says. To do so is to teach heresy period. how:(

So you are wrong and you wrongly interpret the Scripture as you continue to do. :mad: TOLIP TROOPS are wrong in their view because it is a Philosophy and not Biblical at all. Every sad :(

TwinCrier

9th October 2006, 10:00 AM

Context is everything!

holdon

9th October 2006, 10:27 AM

To prove that Paul was addressing Christians only read this:

With the exception of Timothy, and TitusI appreciate it that you have put a lot of effort in this reply. I understand your argument to be that in "ransom for all" the "all" only means "christians" since Paul only addresses christians.

But the last sentence hereabove cited proves that your argument is wrong. The epistle to Timothy was written to Timothy. Not "all believers" as you are wanting to say. Therefore the "all" of 1 Tim 2:6 cannot apply to all believers.
Not only that. If you look at the context of 1 Tim 2 starting at verse 1 you see "all men". And these are not only "all believers", because the next verse expounds further: "kings and all that are in dignity".
Then verse 4 completely destroys your argument because it says: "God desires all men should be saved", which are clearly not believers, because believers are saved already! each epistle/letter was written to Christians or churches. Not the lost. How many times did we listen to our fathers rant and rave, and even threaten us when we were bad? Did we not let it go in one ear and out the other? We might have listened to our fathers but we did not hear them The same principle applies to the word of God. How many times must one go to church and listen to the message being preached before one submits? Ten? Twenty? A hundred? There is no answer for that. How can one hear what the word says unless the Spirit is working in them to convict of sin? They can't for one simple reason:"But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned." -2 Cor. 2:14

I thought Paul was only addressing Christians? See 1 Cor 3:1. (by the way your reference is 1 Cor 2:14)
So unless the Spirit is working in a person to convict and open the eyes and ears, they will not hear because they are "spiritually discerned." And regardless of what Paul said, Jesus Himself said:

"Even as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many." -Matt. 20:28

And Mark records the same words:

"For even the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many." -Mk. 10:45

So I'm sorry, but I prefer the Lords words. Wow! This is singular statement. You think Paul's words are not the inspired message of the Holy Spirit which Jesus has sent and would teach all thing on behalf of Jesus? Such reasoning would be the beginning of a very slippery slope.And Jesus said He came to give His life as a rasom for many, not all. Both statements are true of course. And there is a slight but most telling difference between "ransom for many" and "ransom for all" which most translations fail to render properly. Ransom for many = "lutron anti pollon". Whereas ransom for all = "antilutron huper panton". The first case (ransom for many) stresses the aspect of ransom given for (instead of) many. The second case then of 1 Tim 2:6 means that the ransom offer extends to (huper = peri) all. Not, that all people will avail of it. Only the believer can say: ransom was given for (instead of) me.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again, there is nothing in the New Testament that pertains to unbelievers except the message that they are lost in sin and need Jesus Christ as their Personal Savior. Each epistle of the New Testament was written for the Christian to help in our walk with the Lord, or to help us in our walk with our fellow Christian brothers and sisters.

Would Paul teach those who were lost to:

"...that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service." -Rom. 12:1

No, that message is for Christians.

God Bless

Till all are one.

As to the rest of your post where you go into labelling with terms like Pelagian, Semi Pelagian, Arminian, etc.. I have to decline your accusations....

None will be regenerate without them accepting and believing God. Pure and simple.

You tell unbelievers: "go sit there till the Holy Spirit regenerates you and then I will tell you the gospel and then you can believe"???

JacobHall86

9th October 2006, 10:35 AM

Hey, everyone, make sure to keep lighters away from this thread, its full of strawmen, the whole forum will go up in flames.

Hagios17

9th October 2006, 11:43 AM

C- Conditional salvation (believing faith in God's Grace - Condition is man must believe in God Work not mans work - Faith is not a work and is not a special gift either - faith is simply trusting it facts and accepting them or rejecting them)

“Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent.”

…John 6:29

Faith is a work, just not a work of man my friend;)

Conditional implies that a work is needed. Unconditional implies that a work isn’t needed.

U- Unlimited Atonement(For God so loved the World) John 8:12; John 12:46; John 1:4,7; John 12:3233,47; Romans 5:18; I Tim. 2:6; I Tim. 4:10; Heb. 2:9; II Peter 3:9I John 2:2 - God cannot do anything that is unfair or unreasonable.

A simple study of the biblical usage of the word “world” reveals that it can refer to the sheep or the wolves. Those verse clearly don’t support the statement: “God cannot do anything that is unfair or unreasonable.” in relation to loving the world. So I assume you justify the statement with some common sense-common ethical argument. Am I correct?

If God is holy and He is what he says can not be contradicted and must be understood and interpreted in the truth of His Holiness. God’s desire that all be saved is reasonable, but to say God planned the damnation of the many is un-reasonable against God’s Holiness. To Make God be the author of forced damnation is to make God a liar - I Peter 3:9. God can not lie. Heb 6:18

Thoses verses don't qualify what you're saying: that God doesn't send people to hell.

“The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.”

…2 Peter 3:9

In opinion "us-ward", "any" and "all" refers to mankind, but in context refers to the beloved of God: “But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.” - 2 Peter 3:8

R- Resistible Grace(Some believe when they hear other refuse to believe)

“And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.”

…Matthew 16:15-16

It didn’t take Peter’s intellect; his carnal mind to figure out that Christ is God- it took the Spirit. The man of sin cannot bring forth good and acceptable works of choice. These good works are in Christ:

“And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus: That in the ages to come he might shew the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindness toward us through Christ Jesus. For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.”

…Ephesians 2:6-10

E - Eternal Security(Jesus said He would not lose any who the Father gives Him which are all that believe)

I agree. And this doctrine eliminates the doctrine of free will, that we make our own destiny,as God forces us to stay in his hands... but if free will is true then he is contradicting himself.

D- Delivered from being Dead in Trespasses and sin (not eradicated image of God) John 8:12; John 12:46; John 1:4,7; John 12:3233,47; Romans 5:18; I Tim. 2:6; I Tim. 4:10; Heb. 2:9; II Peter 3:9I John 2:2 - The Gospel is the light of the world it is the light men need to believe in God’s work not his own or others. Death is separation not eradication and cessation.

“Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.”

…Matthew 7:16-20

“There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God. They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one. Their throat is an open sepulchre; with their tongues they have used deceit; the poison of asps is under their lips: Whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness: Their feet are swift to shed blood: Destruction and misery are in their ways: And the way of peace have they not known: There is no fear of God before their eyes.”

…Romans 3:11-18

Man’s position is such: that he can’t make a good and profitable decision to choose God. He is absolutely, not partially, averse from spiritual good.

T -Totally
U -Unscriptural and

Huh?… This means that the TULIP has absolutely no accord with scripture.

L- Lost
I - In
P - Philosophical Circular Reasoning

You can just call me a presuppositionalist.

It is fare to say that all camps can claim a believer is an Elect Believer. This is not the issue at all. The issue is How - not that we are.
The Biblical view is that God is not a liar and can not violate His holiness by contradicting His purpose to save the world based on the condition of faith. The “Totally Unscriptural and Lost in Philosophical Circular Reasoning” view is the moving away from a compassionate, loving, just, desiring to save all God to a convenient None Evangelistic Man up stairs who lies against His Character.

Show me from the Scripture where God loves all humanity and were acceptable faith for salvation is of sinful man.

For God so Loved the world. How can any one in their right mind speak against God’s love for all mankind is beyond me.

Where is the scripture to motivate this statement?

But they do and they do it in the mane of God.
I humbly bow before my God and Savior, acknowledging my sinfulness and dependence on Him and I thank God for the Jesus my savior and that God did not abandon me or anyone to hell freely giving me the opportunity to trust in Him.

But because man is sinful by nature his acknowledgement will be sinful and therefore unacceptable, for God is a Holy God. Is it not?

In CHrist

Hagios17

mlqurgw

9th October 2006, 12:05 PM

Hey, everyone, make sure to keep lighters away from this thread, its full of strawmen, the whole forum will go up in flames.
Of course tyhat is because they know that they can't defeat the truth of God. Hence they build a straw man which is easy to tear down and destroy. If they ever actually deal with the truth of what is the Doctrines of Grace they would have nothing to accuse us of. I have yet to see any opponent of Calvinism actually deal with Calvinism. The reason is because they can't. I am working on a post that seeks to define and declare the actual truths taught in the Doctrines of Grace. If I ever get it done and post it we will see if they deal with what is said or only repeat the same old tired song.

JacobHall86

9th October 2006, 01:08 PM

9th October 2006, 01:39 PM

What about Trent? This council denied Calvinism.

GordonSlocum

9th October 2006, 02:08 PM

What many are failing to acknowledge is that often the terms many and all mean the save thing.

We know that all mankind are represented in the Atonement even many Calvinist will admit that.

So what we have when we see is what is known as a Synecdoche of the Whole expressed as a part "many"

The Calvinist reverse the Synecdoche to mean the part "many" as the whole "all"

Scripture supports the former not the later.

GordonSlocum

9th October 2006, 02:12 PM

I'm a Calvinist, but I dont really advertise it. However I would like to point out that at the Synod of Dordt they rejected the Heresy of Arminius, but no Church Council has ever been called in to question Calvinism. Very interesting.
Does that in and of itself make Calvinism correct? Is this a basis on which to establish your doctrine? What is wrong with individual study?

Erinwilcox

9th October 2006, 02:20 PM

Does that in and of itself make Calvinism correct? Is this a basis on which to establish your doctrine? What is wrong with individual study?

Ah! Good point! The key to individual study, however, is to do so with an open mind and a heart which is ready to accept whatever God may show you. For instance, if I were to do a study on covenant theology with my only intent being to show the paedo baptists how they are wrong, then that would not constitue an individual study with an open mind. The same goes for Calvinism/Arminianism.

GordonSlocum

9th October 2006, 03:18 PM

Ah! Good point! The key to individual study, however, is to do so with an open mind and a heart which is ready to accept whatever God may show you. For instance, if I were to do a study on covenant theology with my only intent being to show the paedo baptists how they are wrong, then that would not constitue an individual study with an open mind. The same goes for Calvinism/Arminianism.
You said it well. You are a sharp thinker. [18 years old] That is good.

Gordon

DeaconDean

10th October 2006, 01:10 AM

See Deacon's post to read all the endless passages used out of context to prove a point which only suggest that he is teaching false doctrine, and not willing to acknowledge the following clear passages

Deacon, Please Deacon, stop misleading everyone.

So you are saying that this piece of scripture does not mean what it does:

"All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:" Tim. 3:16

I Timothy 4:10. For it is for this we labor and strive, because we have fixed our hope on the living God, who is the Savior of all men, especially of believers.

Paul wrote to believers - not an issue - Believers like you need to know and be taught by the Bible not Calvin, or the TULIP Troops. I abjure you to cast all those false teaching away and turn to the Bible.

This verse also,

John 12:47. "If anyone hears My sayings and does not keep them, I do not judge him; for I did not come to judge the world, but to save the world.

The only falicy I see to your theology is that you are including all mankind in the "elect." Which if you take our Saviors words, the whole "world" are not part of the "sheep," or rather, "my sheep." (Jn. 10:27)

John 12:47. "If anyone hears My sayings and does not keep them, I do not judge him; for I did not come to judge the world, but to save the world.

Once again, I must call you on this one. Did Jesus not say:

"For the Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgment unto the Son:" -Jn. 5:22

II Peter 2:1. But false prophets also arose among the people, just as there will also be false teachers among you, who will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the Master who bought them, bringing swift destruction upon themselves.

You use that pointed towards me, but friend, how about pointing that verse at yourself? Are you not the one who is promoting the idea that:

God Knows in advance because of His foreknowledge all who will trust in Christ.

I'm not the one who is promoting a theology based on God's "foreknowledge" of some work done on our behalf that qualifies us to be one of the elect. If that was the case, then friend what is being promoted from that statement is election based on works and not of God's grace. And no matter how you slice it, that is wrong. Period. God elected me to be one of His because He seen down the road in time that I would accept and believe makes that an election based on work. God said: "This man is going to believe, therefore I'll make him one of Mine." This is wrong. That is nothing more than "cheap grace." Because God looked down in time that I would believe means that down in time I would merit His favor. Wrong, wrong, wrong. God chose me to be one of His before this world was founded simply because it was:

"...according to the good pleasure of his will," -Eph. 1:5 Not because I would something for Him, or because I would accept Him, but simply because it suited Him to do so.

Do you Calvinist- TULIP TROOPS - Fatalist - think that the word "world" here does not means all mankind ? Surely you are not going to twist this passage to mean something it does not say.

John 3:16. "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life. 17. "For God did not send the Son into the world to judge the world, but that the world might be saved through Him.

The message is to the whole world and "whosoever" in this world believes. The world is the intended total but only the whosoever are the ones saved out of the whole.

Friend, if you want to get technical, the Greek word rendered "world" is "kosmos." And may, not necessarily so, but may be translated universe. Are we to also accept the notion that "For God so loved the universe."

Are the stars in heaven worthy of salvation? Are the "vessels fitted for destruction" worthy for salvation? (Rom. 9:22)

So you are wrong and you wrongly interpret the Scripture as you continue to do. :mad: TOLIP TROOPS are wrong in their view because it is a Philosophy and not Biblical at all. Every sad :(

I don't care what you call me, but what is worse is the people who propitiate the idea that God based His election based of some "foreseen" work done on our part where we are elected because we will eventually come to believing faith. That's sad.

God Bless

Till all are one.

mlqurgw

10th October 2006, 01:29 AM

For someone who makes claims to know the Greek maybe you could twist, oops, explain to us how the word translated Lord in 2Pet. 2:1 is different than the one normally translated Lord. Then maybe you could explain to us how it doesn't mean that He bought the right to rule all mankind by His obedience and now sits on the throne of Heaven as a man ruling all things, even those who reject Him. Perhaps you could tell us why it isn't talking about Him as the Lord of all not just those who allow Him to be.

DeaconDean

10th October 2006, 02:02 AM

But the last sentence hereabove cited proves that your argument is wrong. The epistle to Timothy was written to Timothy. Not "all believers" as you are wanting to say.

Are you reading just what you want or what? Did I not say:

With the exception of Timothy, and Titus, each epistle/letter was written to Christians or churches.

Was Timothy not a Christian? Was Titus not a Christian?

Not only that. If you look at the context of 1 Tim 2 starting at verse 1 you see "all men". And these are not only "all believers", because the next verse expounds further: "kings and all that are in dignity".

Does not the scriptures say:

"I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men; For kings, and for all that are in authority;" -2 Tim 1:1-2

The essence is that we should pray for all men (supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men; For kings, and for all that are in authority And what did Paul say further on? Why were they to pray for them?

"...that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty. For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour;" -2 Tim. 2: 2-3

While Paul did tell Timothy that:

"Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth." -2 Tim. 2:4

This is the same thing Peter says in 2 Pet. 3:19?

But if you take those verses and follow them to their logical conclusion; "Who will have all men to be saved" then it would led to the belief in "universalism." And that will never happen. If all men are "to be saved," who is it that stands in judgment of the Lamb? Who are the goats of Matt. 25:32-33? Fact is, not all men will be saved. So if God would have all men saved, who would be the goats, and who is it that stands in front of the "righteuos judge" and has not their names, written in the Lambs book of life?

Now I did post this scripture:

"But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned." -2 Cor. 2:14

But it was in reponse to your remark that you believed first then received the Spirit.

You said:

I thought Paul was only addressing Christians? See 1 Cor 3:1. (by the way your reference is 1 Cor 2:14)

BTW, thanks for the correction on the scripture. The point of my scripture which you obviously didn't understand is that you said you believed first. This is wrong because unless the Spirit is working in you first, you can't hear. (Jn. 16:8) While we are to preach the gospel to all, unless the Holy Spirit is working within the hearer, they can't understand what they are hearing because that is "spiritually discerned." (1 Cor. 2:14) So how could you hear what the preacher is preaching unless the Spirit was working in you first to convict and open the eyes and ears?

Wow! This is singular statement. You think Paul's words are not the inspired message of the Holy Spirit which Jesus has sent and would teach all thing on behalf of Jesus? Such reasoning would be the beginning of a very slippery slope.

While you accuse me of something here, I'm not gonna get into that. But my point is that Jesus Christ, (God in the flesh) said He came to give his life a ransom for many, not all as Paul said. What you seem to be promoting is elevating Paul's words to that of Jesus'. Jesus said many, Paul said all.

Both statements are true of course. And there is a slight but most telling difference between "ransom for many" and "ransom for all" which most translations fail to render properly. Ransom for many = "lutron anti pollon". Whereas ransom for all = "antilutron huper panton". The first case (ransom for many) stresses the aspect of ransom given for (instead of) many. The second case then of 1 Tim 2:6 means that the ransom offer extends to (huper = peri) all. Not, that all people will avail of it. Only the believer can say: ransom was given for (instead of) me.

You make a statement like this yet deny the doctrine of election???? Geez, give me a break.

As to the rest of your post where you go into labelling with terms like Pelagian, Semi Pelagian, Arminian, etc.. I have to decline your accusations....

Did I say you were one of these? All I have to go on is your posts and to me, your posts smack of these things. Now as to whether or not your one of them, I can not and will not make that statement. It is just from your previous statements, it sounds like you support one of them.

You tell unbelievers: "go sit there till the Holy Spirit regenerates you and then I will tell you the gospel and then you can believe"???

Yet you say, I believe first, then the Spirit comes on/in me. Scriptures show the opposite.

"Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;" -Titus 3:5

"And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment:" -Jn. 16:8

"Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come. He shall glorify me: for he shall receive of mine, and shall shew it unto you." -Jn. 16:13-14

Are you saying that you had the power within you to understand and guide yourself to the truth before the Spirit was working in you?

Seems to me that the scriptures say:

"And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment:" -Jn. 16:8

Jesus Himself breaks it down this way:

"Of sin, because they believe not on me;" (v. 9) You are convicted of sin first. Before all else, sin first.

"Of righteousness, because I go to my Father, and ye see me no more;" (v. 10) Of righteousness second because we have no righteousness.

"But we are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags; and we all do fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away." -Isa. 64:6

"Of judgment, because the prince of this world is judged." (v. 11) Of judgment becase we are in danger of falling into His righteous judgment.

But hey, if we follow your words, you by-passed these steps and believed first then recieved the Spirit. ANd what Jesus said the Spirit does first, is actually done secondary.

You also said:

So, why is God telling Man to do something? Believe. Repent.

I do think in all sincerity, that you go back and read your Bible again. Because Jesus did not first preach believe first, then repent. No friend, Jesus' first message to man was:

"Repent: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand." -Matt. 4:17

Repent first!

Everyone can hear...When I believed I received the Spirit. Not before. Eph 1:13

I still disagree with your statement here. While you may listen to the message being preached, unless the Spirit is working within first, then you will not respond. And unless the Spirit is working first within, then you can't understand the message the preacher is preaching because it is "spiritually discerned."

But hey, you have all the answers, so why should I care? Because what you and GordonSlocum are propagating, is wrong. Plain and simple.

I may have a TULIP that withers, but it don't die!

I see a CURE that kills.

God Bless

Till all are one.

holdon

10th October 2006, 08:55 AM

Does not the scriptures say:

"I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men; For kings, and for all that are in authority;" -2 Tim 1:1-2

The essence is that we should pray for all men (supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men; For kings, and for all that are in authority And what did Paul say further on? Why were they to pray for them?

"...that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty. For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour;" -2 Tim. 2: 2-3

While Paul did tell Timothy that:

"Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth." -2 Tim. 2:4

This is the same thing Peter says in 2 Pet. 3:19?

But if you take those verses and follow them to their logical conclusion; "Who will have all men to be saved" then it would led to the belief in "universalism." And that will never happen. If all men are "to be saved," who is it that stands in judgment of the Lamb? Who are the goats of Matt. 25:32-33? Fact is, not all men will be saved. So if God would have all men saved, who would be the goats, and who is it that stands in front of the "righteuos judge" and has not their names, written in the Lambs book of life? God desiring that all men should be saved has nothing to do with Universalism, because the key as to who will be saved and who not, is in man's hand, not God's: "and ye will not come to me that ye might have life"

BTW, thanks for the correction on the scripture. The point of my scripture which you obviously didn't understand is that you said you believed first. This is wrong because unless the Spirit is working in you first, you can't hear. (Jn. 16:8) Jn 16:8

"And having come, he will bring demonstration to the world, of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment"

I don't see any evidence that the Spirit is working in me first. He may be working on me, as unbeliever, but not in me. The demonstration is to the world. All humanity. That doesn't mean all humanity is saved. So, your proof text doesn't support your view. And how does He demonstrate to the world? Through His Word and His people.

While we are to preach the gospel to all, unless the Holy Spirit is working within the hearer, they can't understand what they are hearing because that is "spiritually discerned." (1 Cor. 2:14) So how could you hear what the preacher is preaching unless the Spirit was working in you first to convict and open the eyes and ears? Unbelievers have their eyes and ears wide open. Even if they close their hearts willingly to refuse the message. The Spirit's work is not in Man, but on Man, by presenting Jesus through the preached Word of God. It is the reception of that Word that makes one spiritually alive and then the Spirit enters this newly created temple.

While you accuse me of something here, I'm not gonna get into that. But my point is that Jesus Christ, (God in the flesh) said He came to give his life a ransom for many, not all as Paul said. What you seem to be promoting is elevating Paul's words to that of Jesus'. Jesus said many, Paul said all. So, you think one Scripture can contradict another? Not so! Paul said something different from Jesus, but both statements are the truth as I think I have shown.

You make a statement like this yet deny the doctrine of election???? Geez, give me a break. Who said I denied the doctrine of election? I never said such a thing. He elected us in Christ before the foundation of the world. But election is not unto salvation, but for another goal: to be participants of God's nature (holy and blameless) before Him in love.

Did I say you were one of these? All I have to go on is your posts and to me, your posts smack of these things. Now as to whether or not your one of them, I can not and will not make that statement. It is just from your previous statements, it sounds like you support one of them.
So, you keep accusing me of being those, whereas I have never said that I was any of them. What does that make you? (slander comes to mind).

Yet you say, I believe first, then the Spirit comes on/in me. Scriptures show the opposite. Your statement is contrary to Eph 1:13

"And when you heard the word of truth (the gospel of your salvation) – when you believed in Christ – you were marked with the seal of the promised Holy Spirit"

The sequence is the same throughout: Word preached => hearing => accepting in belief => new birth, Spirit's temple, etc.

"Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;" -Titus 3:5

"And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment:" -Jn. 16:8

"Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come. He shall glorify me: for he shall receive of mine, and shall shew it unto you." -Jn. 16:13-14

Are you saying that you had the power within you to understand and guide yourself to the truth before the Spirit was working in you? If unbelieving man is not capable of receiving the truth, then why preach?

Seems to me that the scriptures say:

"And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment:" -Jn. 16:8

Jesus Himself breaks it down this way:

"Of sin, because they believe not on me;" (v. 9) You are convicted of sin first. Before all else, sin first.

"Of righteousness, because I go to my Father, and ye see me no more;" (v. 10) Of righteousness second because we have no righteousness.

"But we are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags; and we all do fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away." -Isa. 64:6

"Of judgment, because the prince of this world is judged." (v. 11) Of judgment becase we are in danger of falling into His righteous judgment.

But hey, if we follow your words, you by-passed these steps and believed first then recieved the Spirit. ANd what Jesus said the Spirit does first, is actually done secondary. You confuse the Spirit's work in the world (hint: why isn't the whole world saved?) with the Spirit's work in us, when we have believed. If indeed the Spirit was giving life before belief, then the whole world would be made spiritually alive, because He works in the whole world as Jn 16:8 says, and then all would believe.... This shows the folly of your reasoning.

You also said:

I do think in all sincerity, that you go back and read your Bible again. Because Jesus did not first preach believe first, then repent. No friend, Jesus' first message to man was:

"Repent: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand." -Matt. 4:17

Repent first! Repentance supposes belief of course. But you would only have to go a page back from Jn 16 to see 14:1 and 14:11 "believe on Me"

I still disagree with your statement here. While you may listen to the message being preached, unless the Spirit is working within first, then you will not respond. And unless the Spirit is working first within, then you can't understand the message the preacher is preaching because it is "spiritually discerned." "God has been pleased by the foolishness of the preaching (file:///C:/Documents%20and%20Settings/Willem%20Laptop/My%20Documents/Mijn%20stuff/darby/other%20version/bdbl/BDB/n_1co.html#1:21) to save those that believe. (1 Cor 1:21). Again, the recipe is the same: Word (preaching) => accepting in belief => new birth => salvation. Of course the natural man, that is the man who is only inclined to the "natural things", cannot understand. Like Nicodemus first didn't understand. But when the Spirit blows and when you hear its voice new birth happens. He is born of the Spirit and born of water (the word).

I may have a TULIP that withers, You may be able to live on tulip bulbs for while, like the Dutch experienced in WWII, but it is a one-sided food and makes you weak if not sick in the end.

DeaconDean

10th October 2006, 11:01 PM

Jn 16:8

"And having come, he will bring demonstration to the world, of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment"

I don't see any evidence that the Spirit is working in me first. He may be working on me, as unbeliever, but not in me. The demonstration is to the world. All humanity. That doesn't mean all humanity is saved. So, your proof text doesn't support your view. And how does He demonstrate to the world? Through His Word and His people.

Friend, I don't know which version of the Bible your using but my KJV says for John 16:8:

"And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment:"

So I don't care if yours says demonstrates, mine says the Holy Spirit will reprove (or convict) the world of sin. And BTW, there is no comma after the word "world." If I use your version, it says the the Holy Spirit is going to demonstrate to the world sin. :eek: God forbid! And that is the implied meaning of: "he will bring demonstration to the world," of what, what will He demonstrate, sin? :eek: God Forbid!

You say the Spirit can't work inside the unbeliever.

He may be working on me, as unbeliever, but not in me.

Let me ask you a question. Where does the root of evil lie within a man or woman? My Bible tells me:

"But those things which proceed out of the mouth come forth from the heart; and they defile the man. For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies: These are the things which defile a man:" -Matt. 15:18-20

The Holy Spirit does not work from without, He works from within friend.

If the Spirit does not work within to convict the heart, how can He reprove him of sin if sin comes from the heart?

And while preaching is required, your anology here:

"God has been pleased by the foolishness of the preaching (file:///C:/Documents%20and%20Settings/Willem%20Laptop/My%20Documents/Mijn%20stuff/darby/other%20version/bdbl/BDB/n_1co.html#1:21) to save those that believe. (1 Cor 1:21). Again, the recipe is the same: Word (preaching) => accepting in belief => new birth => salvation. Of course the natural man, that is the man who is only inclined to the "natural things", cannot understand. Like Nicodemus first didn't understand. But when the Spirit blows and when you hear its voice new birth happens. He is born of the Spirit and born of water (the word).

Unless the Spirit is working first, then all that will not take place! Period.

You place believing as the first thing a person does, and you back that up with scripture from Paul in numerous places. Well friend, you missed one place where Paul teaches exactly counter to your arguments!

"But what saith it? The word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth, and in thy heart: that is, the word of faith, which we preach; That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation." -Rom. 10:8-10

The Spirit working within, convicts the heart first. You must change inward first before anything else change. According to Rom. 10:8, the word goes to the heart first! How can the heart accept the word as true before the Spirit works within to change that heart? It is only after the Spirit has convicted (reproved) the heart of sin that the regeneration happens to enable the unbeliever to become a believer. Paul preaches well the fact that the inward and outward war against each other, and it is the inward that serves God, not the outward. So once again, how can the inward change if the Spirit does not work inward first. And another question, which brings salvation, believing or confessing?

According to Paul, believing brings righteousness, but it is confession that brings salvation. And one can not confess that Jesus is Lord but by the Spirit.

"...and that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost." -1 Cor. 12:3

I know what you are going to say, I believed first thus the Spirit entered me and making me able to confess Jesus. No, no, no, not so. According to the scriptures, the heart has to be changed first, which means the Spirit is working from within first, and after the heart is changed, then one can say with the regenerating power of the Spirit that Jesus is Lord. No where in the Bible does it say the Spirit cannot work from within first. And one other point to remember, when Jesus was here, He was the one working to call sinners to repentance. Now that He is gone, that is the Spirit's job. And the Spirit could not come until He (Jesus) was gone.

You charge me here of being wrong by this statement:

Your statement is contrary to Eph 1:13

Well the only answer I can give in defense is:

"...Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost." -Acts 2:38

Now I'm not going to be legalistic as some are, but I also will not back down that the Spirit works within first, then indwells second.

Anyway, you'll never convimce me of your POV. And I'll probably never convince you of my POV. But I am big enough to say when it is time to stop arguing and say God Bless you in your convictions. Why not do the same?

Hey, I will say God Bless you in your convictions.

God Bless and

Till all are one.

holdon

11th October 2006, 10:27 AM

Friend, I don't know which version of the Bible your using but my KJV says for John 16:8:

"And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment:"

So I don't care if yours says demonstrates, mine says the Holy Spirit will reprove (or convict) the world of sin. The word means to deliver the proof (=demonstrate) and to so convince. So, "reprove" in its elementary sense is fine. Convict is way too strong a term, and does not fit for the terms righteousness and judgment. NET bible has a fairly good discussion about it. See there. And BTW, there is no comma after the word "world." If I use your version, it says the the Holy Spirit is going to demonstrate to the world sin. :eek: God forbid! And that is the implied meaning of: "he will bring demonstration to the world," of what, what will