Is God unjust?

[Skandelon]

As to your quotes from Wesley and Gill, I don't take issue with what they said. Granted, I might take issue with what I'm sure Gill may have meant by some of his commentary, but honestly I don't see them step beyond the bounds of what the scripture reveals in these verses. They never say that a dead man can't respond to the powerful life giving message of the Gospel.

These quotes only go to show that you're still not understanding my argument. I agree that man is dead and unable to save or even "quicken" himself. If left alone man would die separated from God for all eternity, I have no doubt. But you seem to ignore the fact that God hasn't left us alone. He sent Christ, the Holy Spirit, the apostles and the gospel message through the scriptures to call all the world to himself. You just don't think that is enough. You must add a second, inward, irresistable calling that the Bible never teaches.

Next item. About the letter to the Corinthians.
We were talking about the natural man, the man dead in sin and trespasses being unable to understand "things of the Spirit". I gave that Scripture to show to you waht the Holy Spirit says about your argument that men so alive to sin welcome and understand the gospel message. They do not.

Your wording here is a bit hard to understand but I think I get what you are trying to say. If you would go back and read my post I answered this argument by showing that Paul was NOT referring to the natural man's inability to understand the gospel, he was speaking about natural man's inability to understand "the deep things of God," the "spiritual matters."

Are these Corinthians still dead in sin and trespasses and therefore unsaved ? No, they are not. Are they still spiritual babies ? Yes, they are.

Agreed.

Consider their treatment of the Lord's supper in 1 Corinthians, consider the man living in sexual abomination. Did Paul consider them unbelievers ? No, he did not. Was Paul telling them about how unbelievers are ? Yes, he was.

Again, I agree with this.

So, stop twisting this discussion just to picture me heretical or stupid, and stick to the topic. We are talking about unregenerates and not regenerates.

Whoa there nelly. You missed my point all together. I was agreeing with you that the "spiritual matters" Paul was addressing in the text you quoted could not be understood by "the natural man" (unregenerates), But I was also pointing out that these same "spiritual matters" were not being understood by believers/regenerates in Corinth either. Therefore, you can't say that the "spiritual matter" Paul speaks of are in reference to the gospel message otherwise the Corithians would be believers either. Do you get what I'm saying?

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />
Christ had faith? I know Christ is the author of our faith. But did Christ require faith to believe in himself? I don't think that is biblically based. I could be wrong. If so please show me. It just doesn't make much sense.

Okay. But again I am reminded of Father Abraham's words to the rich man. You know, in the Bible, Matthew says something about the graves being opened and the saints roaming in the city, which means the Jews saw them, but did Jerusalem convert ? </font>[/QUOTE] What does this have to do with what I said? I asked about Christ's faith and believing in himself and you go off talking about some obscure verse that doesn't relate. Can you make the connection to the questions about Christ's faith and the verses you refer to here?

I can post as many scriptures here, but if you choose to remain blind to it, those scriptures will mean nothing. And I say "choose" not to mean that man indeed has free will, but, because I consider you one of God's own, yet one who 'chooses' to ignore what his God clearly wrote down, just like Paul refused to heed the Holy Spirit's warning through Agabus, the prophet.

Because I disagree with your interpretation of scripture does not mean I'm blind to it, or that choose to ignore "what God clearly wrote down." First, I used to be a Calvinists, second, there is nothing "clearly" written down that supports your claims, third, I'm not ignoring anything...I'm debating you aren't I? If I were ignoring something I wouldn't be here. So lets stop the diversion tactics shall we.

In Himself, no. In His Father, yes. Biblical base ? Read Philippians and Hebrews.

I don't find anything about Christ's faith here, I could be just missing it. Could you just point out a couple verses for me?

Okay. here I will agree with you, this statement does not say that the Gospel is the means of regeneration (which we PB's do not believe). What you said is in line with the gospel bringing life and immortality to light. The elect are lost until God regenerates them in order for the Gospel to convict them and instruct them. But the Gospel will only have that effect on God's people, not all people.

I assume that when you say "regenerate" you mean to make alive, or to give life, correct?

Don't you believe that its the words of Christ, the gospel message, that gives life?

Your problem is that you consider the Gospel a means of regeneration. I say, and my brethren will agree with me, it is not a means of regeneration. God regenerates His people without any need of means.

Scripture? I agree that God could regenerate without means but we are not debating what God could do. We are debating what the Bible says He does. You need biblical support that says God regenerates man without any means.

The Gospel is the whole counsel of God to His people and not to the whole human race,

Oh, God commanded it to be preached to "every creature" but he meant to say to "His people." I see, we need to get that corrected in our Bibles.

You know, I never had any formal study on the Doctrines of Grace.

You're kiddin.

 

[Hamtramck_Mike]

Originally posted by russell55:
This is a quote from something Skandelon wrote on another thread. I hope no one minds if I respond to it here.

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />By removing man's capasity to see and understand Calvinism has given lost men an excuse in judgement.

I just wanted to clarify something. Calvinists think that men retain their natural capacity to understand about God/Christ/the gospel. The problem is that they don't much like what deep down they do know, and so they don't think its of any value to them. They think the "words of life" are useless words. Sort of like lots of kids are in math class. They certainly could understand it, but they don't think it will every be of any use to them, so they don't bother with it. </font>[/QUOTE]I have to call you on this one Brother Russell:

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. 1Co 2:14

We in our wicked, lustful flesh cannot ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever even DESIRE the Gospel of Jesus Christ unless the desire to do so is placed there by God Himself!

Yours in Him,
Michael

 

[Hamtramck_Mike]

Originally posted by Yelsew:
No one has posted anything that explains clearly that there is injustice in God. What I have seen posted is man's perception of God's justice, the victim's view if you will, and we all know that our own view of justice is from our own perspective only. We cannot assume God's view and thus view Justice from that view.

In this you are correct Brother Yelsew!

If God does it or says it, it is Just! End of Discussion!

Yours in Him,
Michael

 

[Skandelon]

Originally posted by Hamtramck_Mike:

Originally posted by russell55:
[qb]

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. 1Co 2:14

We in our wicked, lustful flesh cannot ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever even DESIRE the Gospel of Jesus Christ unless the desire to do so is placed there by God Himself!

Mike, let's look at the leap you make in your interpretation of this verse. You take a verse that says natural man cannot accept/understand the "things of the Spirit of God" to mean that all lost men are unable to understand the gospel message. Your leap is that you assume that when Paul says "the things of the Spirit of God" that he is meaning the gospel message. If you read the context you will see that Paul is speaking about the "deep things of God." Things that even the Corinthian brethern were unable to understand as recorded in the following verses. How is it that Paul would consider them brethern if they haven't understood the gospel?

The "things" Paul is speaking about natural men not having the capasity to understand are the same things that the carnal believers can't understand either, therefore it can't be in reference to the gospel message.

 

[russell55]

I have to call you on this one Brother Russell:

First off, I'm not a brother--it's a surname.

We in our wicked, lustful flesh cannot ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever even DESIRE the Gospel of Jesus Christ unless the desire to do so is placed there by God Himself!

You're not disagreeing with me. That's exactly what I said:

The problem is that they don't much like what deep down they do know, and so they don't think its of any value to them.

We don't like it--We don't desire it--we don't value it. Different ways of saying exactly the same thing.

 

[russell55]

The "things" Paul is speaking about natural men not having the capasity to understand are the same things that the carnal believers can't understand either, therefore it can't be in reference to the gospel message.

I don't think so. I think chapter two ties in with chapter 1. It's the Spirit that turns the "foolishness" of the gospel into the wisdom and power of God. The Spirit is the one who does the calling that changes what all men (both Jews and Gentiles) naturally percieve as foolishness into deep things (wisdom) of God, and so, those who have the Spirit understand what God is freely giving--they understand those spriritual truths and rightly discern their value.

It is through God's doing (through the Spirit) that Christ becomes to us wisdom, and thus He becomes our justification and sanctification and redemption.

 

[Skandelon]

Then how do you explain the next chapter which clearly says that these "brethern" he is speaking to haven't accepted these same spiritual truths?