Faith Received Part Trey!!

[preacher4truth]

I would think it means your totally sinful....It means you’re a lousy, stinking, no-good, dirty stinking sinner. It means you will do bad stuff and you like to do bad stuff. Doing bad stuff is one of your best things. You lie, cheat on your taxes, get all torqued-off at people, spread bad rumors, get angry at stupid things and take things that are not yours. It means that you are rude, vain, and selfish. It also means that you are capable of doing the worst things you can imagine…committing murder, adultery, and doing violent harm to others. This is all IN YOU and the odds that you will commit these horrible acts are extremely favorable....Been there & done all that!

Yet he thinks he's a pretty good feller. He's claimed passages in Ez. showing how we CAN do good, that we ARE good. Which is taken as a proof text, and not going beyond that to context, and then to the whole counsel of God.

More nonsense contrary to sound doctrine.

He then believes we are not nearly as bad off as NT theology, and OT theology says mankind is.

Someone else wants us to think we just aren't that bad off. I reject him and his lies. He is the father of lies, and I won't embrace them, not even in their subtle counterparts.

"You won't surely die!!!" Yeah. Sure.

 

[Skandelon]

Retract what others have apparently said, in the same thread, that faith is not a gift from God?

That is not what you said in that post. You said that many believed that, "man is good, and man can reach and do it himself." DHK never said that. He has said over and over that "God doesn't give faith to the unregenerate."

You've not read winmans threads, that man is good, not bad, with proof-texts?

Can you quote him or link that post so I can see it for myself? It's just difficult for me to believe that anyone here believes men are born "good."

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Yet he thinks he's a pretty good feller. He's claimed passages in Ez. showing how we CAN do good, that we ARE good. Which is taken as a proof text, and not going beyond that to context, and then to the whole counsel of God.

More nonsense contrary to sound doctrine.

He then believes we are not nearly as bad off as NT theology, and OT theology says mankind is.

Someone else wants us to think we just aren't that bad off. I reject him and his lies. He is the father of lies, and I won't embrace them, not even in their subtle counterparts.

"You won't surely die!!!" Yeah. Sure.

Here is what I know.....I rejected God. Didnt really believe in him & therefore lived a life of sin. There everything I did was sinful....it was ALL dirty filthy rags. Without Christ my brothers, you are sin.

 

[preacher4truth]

That is not what you said in that post. You said that many believed that, "man is good, and man can reach and do it himself." DHK never said that. He has said over and over that "God doesn't give faith to the unregenerate."

Can you quote him or link that post so I can see it for myself? It's just difficult for me to believe that anyone here believes men are born "good."

You're a moderator and should be up on these things. I will try and help but I am not doing a forum search. All of what they have said about this has led us to our present discussions and I don't feel obligated this late into this, to prove what you should be aware of already.

Did you see where DHK quoted Ezekiel saying, see, we are good and we can change? Search "leopards spots" in forums yourself and go see.

You're telling me you've never seen this, when Winman, who has said this many times, that we are good, election is conditioned upon mans works, and yet you're saying you have never seen this?

Search "God judges man according to his works" for Winmans take on this, or conditional or whatever, but he's said it. It's been said on here so often I find it hard to believe you as a moderator haven't taken note.

Also, this isn't the first time I have received this from you, and that you've admitted not knowing things said within threads.

I also don't like the implication, from you, that I'm lying about it. I'm supposed to do homework on this for you? It's well documented what I've claimed and I'm not going to go around finding what you should already know as a moderator, that has been expressed often enough that you should have taken notice.

This is the entire reason for their attacking me for not agreeing with them on these things. These are their beliefs that I have responded to.

Your search should open your eyes to my stance against them.


- Peace

 

[Skandelon]

All I'm asking is to allow them to speak for themselves by providing a quote to support your accusations. To say "man is good, and man can reach and do it himself," is a very different from saying that man has the ability to respond to God's revelation. You seem to equate the two, which is a gross misrepresentation. This is why I ask you to provide quotes or links to support your otherwise unfounded accusations.

 

[preacher4truth]

All I'm asking is to allow them to speak for themselves by providing a quote to support your accusations. To say "man is good, and man can reach and do it himself," is a very different from saying that man has the ability to respond to God's revelation. You seem to equate the two, which is a gross misrepresentation. This is why I ask you to provide quotes or links to support your otherwise unfounded accusations.

Go search yourself. Or are you afraid you might prove me correct?

You're the one saying I am wrong, the burden lies with you to prove it.

You're the one equating the two. Obviously you're behind the times here as a moderator and for that I take your flak.

Did you do a search or no?

 

[Winman]

That is not what you said in that post. You said that many believed that, "man is good, and man can reach and do it himself." DHK never said that. He has said over and over that "God doesn't give faith to the unregenerate."

Can you quote him or link that post so I can see it for myself? It's just difficult for me to believe that anyone here believes men are born "good."

What I believe is that a baby is neither good or bad.

Rom 9:11 (For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth; )

Both Esau and Jacob were alive in their mother's womb when this was said of them, Paul said they had done neither good or evil.

If folks don't want to believe that, that is their right, but I believe it.

Sin is not something you are, sin is something you DO. Notice Paul said they had not DONE good or evil. Sin is transgression of the law. And I believe the scriptures show God does not hold a child accountable until they are old enough to know good from evil and then knowingly and willingly sin.

A newborn baby cannot sin, they cannot even form thoughts. How can a baby lie? They don't know what a lie is. A lie is something you do with intent.

I could show many scriptures I believe clearly refute Original Sin, but very few are open to it. But it's there and I could show you (I've already showed you one of many verses).

 

[Skandelon]

Go search yourself. Or are you afraid you might prove me correct?

You're the one saying I am wrong, the burden lies with you to prove it.

No, the burden lies with the one making the accusation. Why is it my burden to prove a case you brought? That makes no sense.

As you can see from Winman's reply, he doesn't believe "man is good, and man can reach and do it himself," so who are the "many" here who do believe that?

Did you do a search or no?

I have been reading Winman and DHK long before you got here and I know they don't believe "man is good, and man can reach and do it himself." You are reading something into their posts that is not there just like you read into the scriptures.

 

[preacher4truth]

No, the burden lies with the one making the accusation. Why is it my burden to prove a case you brought? That makes no sense.

As you can see from Winman's reply, he doesn't believe "man is good, and man can reach and do it himself," so who are the "many" here who do believe that?

I have been reading Winman and DHK long before you got here and I know they don't believe "man is good, and man can reach and do it himself." You are reading something into their posts that is not there just like you read into the scriptures.

Not at all. I will go provide the proof.

Your eisegetical accusation is you, not me.

You read much into scripture. Try exegesis maybe?

By the way, what I said they said, son, is while I was here. Not prior to.

 

[Skandelon]

Not at all. I will go provide the proof.

Thank you. I look forward to seeing that.

By the way, what I said they said, son, is while I was here. Not prior to.

Good. Then it should be very simple to quote them saying that "man is good, and man can reach and do it himself." And sense there are "many" here who believe that maybe you could provide support from "many" people and not just Winman or DHK?

 

[Winman]

No, the burden lies with the one making the accusation. Why is it my burden to prove a case you brought? That makes no sense.

As you can see from Winman's reply, he doesn't believe "man is good, and man can reach and do it himself," so who are the "many" here who do believe that?

I have been reading Winman and DHK long before you got here and I know they don't believe "man is good, and man can reach and do it himself." You are reading something into their posts that is not there just like you read into the scriptures.

How many times do I have to say it is IMPOSSIBLE for any man to be saved without God's grace before P4T gets it?

What we disagree on is what that grace is. I say that it is the word of God that enables a man to believe. Paul asked how we can believe in him of whom we have not heard, well, the scriptures tell us of Jesus and so we can believe.

He thinks God magically zaps a man, something never mentioned in scripture.

Hey P4T, show me ANY verse in the scriptures that says a man must be regenerated to have the ability to believe. You can't, because it's not there and YOU KNOW IT.

 

[preacher4truth]

Thank you. I look forward to seeing that.

Good. Then it should be very simple to quote them saying that "man is good, and man can reach and do it himself." And sense there are "many" here who believe that maybe you could provide support from "many" people and not just Winman or DHK?

No you don't and when I provide it, you'll eisegetically analyze and intepret it like you do God's Word.

This isn't the first time you've not known what was within a thread, after accusing me of lying.

I said winman said God judges according to our works and elects us conditionally, not your exact phrase "man is good and can reach..." which is paraphrasing his belief implied. That is what I am supplying to you.

 

[Skandelon]

No you don't and when I provide it

No, I really do look forward to you providing quotes from many here who believe "man is good, and man can reach and do it himself."

This isn't the first time you've not known what was within a thread, after accusing me of lying.

When have I every accused you of lying? You misrepresent others views, but I've never said you lie.

All I'm doing is asking you to provide support for your accusations. If you can't do that then you shouldn't make them.

I said winman said God judges according to our works and elects us conditionally, not your exact phrase "man is good and can reach..." which is paraphrasing his belief implied. That is what I am supplying to you.

How does the phrase "God judges according to our works and elects us conditionally" mean "man is good, and man can reach and do it himself?" Especially in light of what Winman has explained to you in his last few posts?

He affirms the need for God's grace, just as you do. He just believe's God's grace is resistible. He doesn't believe, as you implied, that man can do it on his own and is inherently good enough to save himself. Plus, you said "many" here believe that, but have only referred to two members thus far and neither of them believe what you accuse them of believing. If you continue to misrepresent others I will call you on it. If you don't like that, then stop misrepresenting others beliefs and allow them to speak for themselves by simply quoting their actual words.

 

[Skandelon]

How many times do I have to say it is IMPOSSIBLE for any man to be saved without God's grace before P4T gets it?

Apparently more than you already have.

 

[Winman]

No you don't and when I provide it, you'll eisegetically analyze and intepret it like you do God's Word.

This isn't the first time you've not known what was within a thread, after accusing me of lying.

I said winman said God judges according to our works and elects us conditionally, not your exact phrase "man is good and can reach..." which is paraphrasing his belief implied. That is what I am supplying to you.

2 Cor 5:10 For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad.

Does this say we will be judged by God for our works (the things done in his body) whether they be good or bad?

The original point I tried to make will probably go right over your head, but here goes:

How can God judge whether the things done in our bodies are good or bad if all of them are bad? In other words, the word "whether" in this verse would be nonsensical if all we could do is evil.

That will probably cause a short in your Calvinist wired mind, but think about it.

 

[Gershom]

2 Cor 5:10 For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad.

Does this say we will be judged by God for our works (the things done in his body) whether they be good or bad?

The original point I tried to make will probably go right over your head, but here goes:

How can God judge whether the things done in our bodies are good or bad if all of them are bad? In other words, the word "whether" in this verse would be nonsensical if all we could do is evil.

That will probably cause a short in your Calvinist wired mind, but think about it.

:laugh::laugh::laugh: Good one, Winman.

 

[preacher4truth]

here you go skandalon


http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=72164&highlight=election

Take note or #4, #30 (dr. bob), winmans rebuttal of #30 (dr. bob) which you can find yourself, and which you should already know as someone allegedly moderating, #101 and following, and see for yourself winmans belief that man is good, and election conditional upon that.

jbh28 also got on me for showing this belief of winman, saying it wasn't true, then apologized to me later for it, because it was in fact true as he discovered.

As for DHK, go find it yourself. Look up leopards spots, and find out for yourself how he says "see, man IS good and can change."

It's time you knew what was up in here. I shouldn't have to inform you nor report posts or go prove a thing to any moderator.

My objection stands. These beliefs stem from Pelagius and are false. Faith is the gift of God, and we are not inherently good, nor do we have the good both winman and DHK claim we have, that is against unconditional love and unconditional election whereby in these God chooses us.

If I believed your arminian theology, I'd catch no flak. In other words, I totally dsagree with arminius, and arminian theology altogether. It's eisegetical and falls short of all truth and of Gods full Sovereignty.

I also reject the semi-pelagian views that man is "good" as they have stated and can change on their own. FInd DHK's post and see for yourself. Pelagius believed the same things. This is exactly why DHK did NOT want me bringing ANY theologians into the mix because it exposed where his beliefs came from, in other word, no proving that he is wrong allowed, and no sources for that.

 

[quantumfaith]

You're incorrect: Wrong. Everything man does is useless and he remains wicked in works and at enmity with God until in Christ. Go read Ephesians, Romans, Colossians. Titus.

You still hold to conditional election, right? That the good you claim above earns your election to salvation, and you deny it is all up to God still (unconditional) correct?

You need to slow down and read. Here is what Winman said.

You are correct, we are all of those things, and capable of any evil.

But we are also able to do good things, even the worst man tells the truth at times. Telling the truth is not sin, it is good. Even the most evil men love their children and families. This is why Jesus said we being evil know HOW (read and see for yourself) to give good gifts to our children. Jesus said men do good to those who love them.

Not a single mention of "conditional election" as per your allegation. Not a single mention of man "earning" his salvation.

 

[preacher4truth]

Apparently more than you already have.

He hasn't done anything. You're not paying attention. Again.

That you believe I said that is status quo for you. You'll believe anything about an alleged calvinist, yet a arminian/partial pelagian can say what he wants and you take it hook line and sinker with no evidence.

Show me one post where I said man gets saved without Gods grace, or where I said he said that.

Let's see proof.

[snip - inflammatory comment deleted]
I'll be waiting.

By the way skandalon, I've posted my proof. Even Dr. Bob took note of what winman said. At least he pays attention as a moderator.

 

[quantumfaith]

All I'm asking is to allow them to speak for themselves by providing a quote to support your accusations. To say "man is good, and man can reach and do it himself," is a very different from saying that man has the ability to respond to God's revelation. You seem to equate the two, which is a gross misrepresentation. This is why I ask you to provide quotes or links to support your otherwise unfounded accusations.

Thank You, could not have expressed it better if I tried.