Please Explain the "I" in TULIP

I'm curious, do you see the Bible as having the words of God or that it is the Word of God. Also, do you see that the power of the Bible comes from being the Word of God or that it comes from the Word of God made alive once the Holy Spirit uses it in the heart of an individual?

No ulterior motive, just trying to see where you stand on those issues.

 

I don't think scripture ever calls itself "the word of God," so I'll have to go with the first one if I'm having to choose.

The bible has parts in it that even the authors say "this is not from God" but just give their preferences, so I don't think it would be accurate to call it that.

I don't even pretend to understand the inner workings of the Spirit. I just know that truth has power. You speak truth to someone in love and MAN it is sooo cool to watch it impact them. Now, that truth is powerful because of its source, not because of me or the words themselves. Truth is Spirit according to 1 John, so I don't know we can separate the two by speculating that the WORDs of truth can be preached but the Spirit NOT be at work. That is like saying I'm reading a Grisham book but its not Grisham's work. How is that possible?

So, is the Holy Spirit doing some secret inward moving while the truth is being spoken, maybe. I don't know. I just know they go hand in hand. And just because there are not 'results' after the truth is preached, doesn't mean the Spirit didn't work. We just may not see the results until later.

Make sense?

 

uh......wow!

 

What did I say that is not true? Does the scripture ever call itself, 'The Word of God?' No. It's not that I would really have a problem with that title, but I prefer to stick to words actually used by the Bible itself.

Are there some passages where the authors say they are giving their opinion on a matter? Yes. So, if the author themselves say "this is not from God...this is my view" etc, then would you consider that "a Word of God" and contradict the very authority you are claiming to support as being authoritative?

What exactly did I say that warrants a "wow" and silence?

Oh, and I fully affirm the Baptist, Faith and Message's statement on the Scriptures:

 

To someone who claims at one point to have held to calvinism...this posted error refutes that idea very quickly....You and DHK as P4T has posted do not understand the doctrine being discussed..

In this passage we have this;

The fact that reprobates resist the Holy Spirit...always...then go on to hell...has nothing to do with the irresistable....efficacious grace of God.


It is spoken of as irresistable...in that the elect do not ultimately resist it,they are made willing by the Spirit of God.

It is spoken of as efficacious because it always accomplishes God's purpose in saving His elect.

Reprobates like those in Acts 7:51 always resist the Holy Spirit.....but reprobates are never the object of the irresistable call. NEVER.
Enemies of grace,and those who have been mis-lead or because of pride remain uninformed of the clear teaching of the grace of God in each aspect of the means of grace.....

All the Father gives to me shall come to me.......jn6:37a.........no more, no less...they come by the effectual drawing of the Spirit of God

DHK...you are in the same sinking ship as webdog;

Steven knew exactly what he was talking about...and it was not irresistable grace ...it was reprobation.....you and webdog miss completely what the term implies.....it is not ultimately resisted......read any calvinist....read the posted link if you want to actually learn about it....
If you just want to object, to object....just join in with Van.
But not one of these objections actually addresses the doctrine taught...as usual.....because you cannot refute the plain teaching of the verses that give the doctrine of the Historic church as presented in all the confessions;
Like here in the 1689;
Chapter 10: Of Effectual Calling
1._____ Those whom God hath predestinated unto life, he is pleased in his appointed, and accepted time, effectually to call, by his Word and Spirit, out of that state of sin and death in which they are by nature, to grace and salvation by Jesus Christ; enlightening their minds spiritually and savingly to understand the things of God; taking away their heart of stone, and giving unto them a heart of flesh; renewing their wills, and by his almighty power determining them to that which is good, and effectually drawing them to Jesus Christ; yet so as they come most freely, being made willing by his grace. ( Romans 8:30; Romans 11:7; Ephesians 1:10, 11; 2 Thessalonians 2:13, 14; Ephesians 2:1-6; Acts 26:18; Ephesians 1:17, 18; Ezekiel 36:26; Deuteronomy 30:6; Ezekiel 36:27; Ephesians 1:19; Psalm 110:3; Song of Solomon 1:4 )
2._____ This effectual call is of God's free and special grace alone, not from anything at all foreseen in man, nor from any power or agency in the creature, being wholly passive therein, being dead in sins and trespasses, until being quickened and renewed by the Holy Spirit; he is thereby enabled to answer this call, and to embrace the grace offered and conveyed in it, and that by no less power than that which raised up Christ from the dead.
( 2 Timothy 1:9; Ephesians 2:8; 1 Corinthians 2:14; Ephesians 2:5; John 5:25; Ephesians 1:19, 20 )

3._____ Elect infants dying in infancy are regenerated and saved by Christ through the Spirit; who worketh when, and where, and how he pleases; so also are all elect persons, who are incapable of being outwardly called by the ministry of the Word.
( John 3:3, 5, 6; John 3:8 )

4._____ Others not elected, although they may be called by the ministry of the Word, and may have some common operations of the Spirit, yet not being effectually drawn by the Father, they neither will nor can truly come to Christ, and therefore cannot be saved: much less can men that receive not the Christian religion be saved; be they never so diligent to frame their lives according to the light of nature and the law of that religion they do profess.
( Matthew 22:14; Matthew 13:20, 21; Hebrews 6:4, 5; John 6:44, 45, 65; 1 John 2:24, 25; Acts 4:12; John 4:22; John 17:3 )

 

Skan,

you said this;

This statement as written is error....bigtime. I would like for you to re-think this....in this way....when Paul says this;

Paul is not saying he is giving a "preference" what he is saying is he is not giving a direct quote from Jesus.....He is speaking from His own apostolic authority.

In vs 10 he is giving a direct quote.....in verse 12 his own Spirit led apostolic teaching.....

It is all the word of God......it does not contain the word of God...it is the word of God.

 

Young's Literal Translation reads:

the Spirit where he willeth doth blow, and his voice thou dost hear, but thou hast not known whence he cometh, and whither he goeth; thus is every one who hath been born of the Spirit.`

If I knock out the 'in between' for clarity's sake, what have I changed?:

"the Spirit where he willeth doth blow......thus is every one who hath been born of the Spirit."

In this instance, nothing.

No one can stop the Spirit from going where He wills, therefore the Spirit of God is irresistible concerning the spiritual birth from above. The elect are totally 100% passive in it and cannot prevent it from happening. The elect have no choice in the matter, thank God.

 

This is Barthianism. I think you will want to reconsider.

'All Scripture is God-breathed.' 'Holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.' 'The God of Israel said, the rock of Israel spoke to me.' 'My speech and my preaching were not with enticing words of man's wisdom.' 'The revelation of Jesus Christ which God sent by His angel to His servant John.' 'They were slain for the word of God.'

Steve

 

Not really, but thanks. You have enlightened me as to your stance and that was helpful. Perhaps we can discuss this further in another thread.

 

You have misrepresented scripture, turning a word meant to refer to the wind into a word mean to represent the Spirit of God. You have suggests it does not say the wind blows where the wind wills, but rather the Spirit goes where God wills. This is true, but John 3:8 does not actually say that. It actually says we are unable to comprehend the action of God's Spirit upon those God causes to be born again.

The main point is Calvinism takes vague verses and reads into those verses their doctrines of grace. They are false doctrines with no actual support in scripture.

 

Does John 6 say "enabled?"

The Calvinist "enabling" is yet another name, they present their false views in code, and then shift discussion away by making personal attacks, for irresistible grace. The grace is revelation, which enables a person to respond or not, but does not compel irresistible that the person come to Jesus.

Why did the Calvinists shift from a discussion of irresistible grace to a discussion of "enabling?" Or why in other threads to "Efficacious Call" or "Gift of Faith?" To avoid the truth. To continue the fiction of regeneration before faith, which is bedrock Calvinism and yet demonstrated false by John 1:12-13.

Note the plays from their deceptive book:

(1) Confuse a denial of regeneration before faith with a denial of regeneration, i.e refer to a changed heart and then say so and so denies this.

(2) Never explain why God needs to harden hearts if the person at conception could not respond affirmatively to the gospel message.

(3) Charge the person presenting truth as a heretic, or is ignorant, or does not understand, or any other way to question the person's qualifications and character to shift the discussion away from the false doctrines of Calvinism.

(4) Act as a gang of thugs, this person posting this part of the play book, then another agreeing with it.

(5) Misrepresent an opponents position to shift discussion to a strawman and avoid discussion of the false doctrine of Calvinism.

(6) Shift the discussion to a personal perspective (I think you come at it sideways) rather than the topic, again to hide the truth under an avalanche of innuendo.

 

Either you are blatantly, unabashedly, misrepresenting scripture yourself, or you simply don't know a hill of beans about what you're writing. The word here is pneuma, and it indeed does refer to the Holy Spirit, i.e., the third person of the trinity:

The KJV New Testament Greek Lexicon

Strong's Number: 4151

Pneuma

Definition

the third person of the triune God, the Holy Spirit, coequal, coeternal with the Father and the Son sometimes referred to in a way which emphasises his personality and character (the \\Holy\\ Spirit)
sometimes referred to in a way which emphasises his work and power (the Spirit of \\Truth\\) never referred to as a depersonalised force
the spirit, i.e. the vital principal by which the body is animated the rational spirit, the power by which the human being feels, thinks, decides
the soul

a spirit, i.e. a simple essence, devoid of all or at least all grosser matter, and possessed of the power of knowing, desiring, deciding, and acting a life giving spirit
a human soul that has left the body
a spirit higher than man but lower than God, i.e. an angel used of demons, or evil spirits, who were conceived as inhabiting the bodies of men
the spiritual nature of Christ, higher than the highest angels and equal to God, the divine nature of Christ

the disposition or influence which fills and governs the soul of any one the efficient source of any power, affection, emotion, desire, etc.

a movement of air (a gentle blast) of the wind, hence the wind itself
breath of nostrils or mouth

King James Word Usage - Total: 385

Spirit 111, Holy Ghost 89, Spirit (of God) 13, Spirit (of the Lord) 5, (My) Spirit 3, Spirit (of truth) 3, Spirit (of Christ) 2, human (spirit) 49, (evil) spirit 47, spirit (general) 26, spirit 8, (Jesus' own) spirit 6, (Jesus' own) ghost 2, miscellaneous 21

 

Sorry but you are the one with so much pride you cannot accept the truth. The same word is used for both Spirit and Wind, but the context requires wind. No one hears the Spirit approaching like the wind.

You referred to the KJV which translates it "wind." As does the NIV, NASB, HCSB, ESV and NKJV.

Why are you diverting attention from irresistible grace with an absurd argument? Oh to hide the truth?

 

Matthew 23:13 tells us of folks who are entering heaven. According to Calvinism, they would have to have been "enabled" "regenerated" "quickened" and given the gift of faith for them to be "entering heaven." But they are blocked, turned aside, prevented by false teachers presenting false teachings. So "Irresistible Grace" is not scriptural, because these had received whatever grace is necessary to be "entering heaven" yet were turned aside. QED.

 

John 5:21 does not say when Jesus "quickens" whom He will, so Calvinism points to the verse as supporting regeneration before faith. Fiddlesticks.

John 6:63 says Christ's words are spirit and the spirit quickens, but does not say when you hear the gospel it makes you alive, which is the mistaken view of Calvinism.

Romans 8:11 refers to being physically quickened after being indwelt with the Holy Spirit. This refers to our physical resurrection to life at the Lord's second coming and has nothing to do with regeneration before faith.

1 Corinthians 15:45 refers to Jesus being a quickening Spirit but does not address when a person is quickened by His Spirit.

Ephesians 2:1 says we have been quickened who were dead in our sins. So again, the timing of the quickening is not addressed. And so it is with this vagueness that Calvinism pours its man-made doctrines into scripture.

But Ephesians 2:5 counters Calvinism's assertions because it teaches we are quickened "together with Christ." Therefore only when God puts us spiritually in Christ are we together with Christ and therefore made alive, quickened, regenerated, born again, born from above and become spiritual children of God.

Colossians 2:13 makes the same point, we are quickened together with Christ and not before God puts us in Christ.

 

I see post 138 is play number 4 from post 133. There are so predictable in their deceptive practices.

John 3:8 provides absolutely no support what so ever for the false doctrine of Irresistible Grace, no matter how many times they change the subject!