Do You Believe in Absolutes?

[Jerry Shugart]

Thus, we show the atheist how their system is a failure based on their own presuppositions and that the only one that stands is the Christian viewpoint.

Again, no mattter what you say to an atheist about God he cannot understand them unless he receives the Spirit:

"For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God. Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God" (1 Cor.2:11-12).

There is only one way of receiving the Spirit and that is by believing the gospel, as evidenced by the following rhetorical question asked by Paul:

"I would like to learn just one thing from you: Did you receive the Spirit by the works of the law, or by believing what you heard?" (Gal.3:2).

It is through regeneration will they believe, so then we turn to the Bible and Special Revelation.

Are you saying that they are regenerated prior to hearing the gospel despite the following passages which contradict that view?:

"Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God...and this is the word which by the gospel is preached unto you" (1 Pet.123,25).

"Of his own will begat he us with the word of truth, that we should be a kind of firstfruits of his creatures" (Jas,1:8).

There were no evidence. His statement was not a rational proposition, evidence, and conclusion.

Of course anyone can SAY that something is not a rational proposition, evidence and conclusion. It is an entirely thing to prove it. So please prove what I said here is in error:

Here is what the Calvinists themselves say about the light of nature:

"The light of nature sheweth that there is a God, who hath lordship and sovereignty over all, is good, and doth good unto all, and is therefore to be feared..." (The Westminster Confession of Faith; 21/1).

In the following verses we can see that "all men" can know God's eternal power and divine nature based soley on the light of nature:

"The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of people, who suppress the truth by their wickedness, since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse" (Ro.1:18-20).

Those who "suppress the truth" of that which God has made plain are "without excuse" when they deny the existence of God. Another display of God's eternal power revealed in nature, the weather, results in many having a fear or reverance of God:

"He directeth it under the whole heaven, and his lightning unto the ends of the earth.After it a voice roareth: he thundereth with the voice of his excellency; and he will not stay them when his voice is heard...Fair weather cometh out of the north: with God is terrible majesty...Men do therefore fear him" (Job 37:3-4,22,24).

The Hebrew word translated "fear" in this verse means "to inspire reverence or godly fear or awe" (Gesenius's Lexicon).

This demonstrates that "all men" have the ability to know that God exists and all men therefore have the ability to have a reverence of God.

Again, if I made an error then tell me exactly what it is.

Thanks!

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Ruiz: the difference is that you believe Scripture is okay to make a point, but you believe it is inadequate.

HP: Let's see how much you really understand. Inadequate for what?

Ruiz: Thus I am asking you to make your points rationally without Scripture. If Scripture is not to be trusted, you cannnot use it to make your point. I want you to make your point without the Bible. Why? I can make my point using Scripture, but you will reject my arguments on the perspicuity and other doctrines of the Bible. Thus, I want to hold you to the standard within your worldview.

HP: Get serious for a moment. What you really desire is to be able to present your interpretation of Scripture as gospel, disallowing any and all other evidence from God to be introduced that would or might prove your interpretation false. I believe I was right in what so many consider as sola Biblica. It is simply a way to say, 'I, sola, will be the one and only one to decide what the Biblica says.'

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Ruiz: To say that we judge scripture is really arrogant. God's Word is not judged by man, but judges man. Like with Job, to question God's Word is saying we are superior to God. Rather, my point is to say that the Word should not be subject to me, but I am subject to God's Word.

HP: Why should I not simply view this at face value, and consider your stated opinion here as arrogance? This is what I hear you saying. I Ruiz, alone, am the only one here that is subject to the Word of God. All others that disagree with my interpretations must believe they are superior to God.

God's Word is not limited to the opinions of Ruiz or HP, nor any private interpretation of either. It is proper for others to judge the opinions of Ruiz and HP and their interpretations of Scripture by any God inspired means available, whether that be Scripture, nature or intuitive God instilled first truths of reason, matters of fact, and immutable principles of justice. God's truth never is at antipodes with any other truth granted to us by God. They all need to be examined in light of the other, intuitive in light of Scriptural, and Scriptural in light of intuitive revelation. Truth should be harmonized with truth. One may have many uncertainties, but there should be no absurdities allow to stand in any realm truth is found or in any conclusion or interpretation.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Ruiz, feel free to hold your posts to me for now so as to concentrate on the post from Jerry. I hope we have many years to discuss together. I do not need all my questions answered now. :thumbsup:

 

[Ruiz]

Again, no mattter what you say to an atheist about God he cannot understand them unless he receives the Spirit:

I agree, that is why I am a presuppositionalist. In fact, that is a foundational doctrine of presuppositionalists, and why we are not classical or evidential apologists. When we argue the point is two fold, to show the irrationality of their own belief and then move to the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

There is only one way of receiving the Spirit and that is by believing the gospel, as evidenced by the following rhetorical question asked by Paul:

This is where we disagree. I believe someone will not believe unless the SPirit regenerates the person. This is the work of God and not their work.

Are you saying that they are regenerated prior to hearing the gospel despite the following passages which contradict that view?:

The filling of the spirit and regeneration are two different issues. Normally, regeneration is argued but should begin with defining the term. I think people have two different definitions when arguing the issue, thus they will never agree.

Of course anyone can SAY that something is not a rational proposition, evidence and conclusion. It is an entirely thing to prove it. So please prove what I said here is in error:

Here is what the Calvinists themselves say about the light of nature:

"The light of nature sheweth that there is a God, who hath lordship and sovereignty over all, is good, and doth good unto all, and is therefore to be feared..." (The Westminster Confession of Faith; 21/1).

In the following verses we can see that "all men" can know God's eternal power and divine nature based soley on the light of nature:

"The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of people, who suppress the truth by their wickedness, since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse" (Ro.1:18-20).

Those who "suppress the truth" of that which God has made plain are "without excuse" when they deny the existence of God. Another display of God's eternal power revealed in nature, the weather, results in many having a fear or reverance of God:

The key word of disagreement is "when" as when you say that they are condemned "when" they reject God. This is not the Roman theology which say that General Revelation is paramount to the law, it only condemns and cannot save. It is, ultimately, not a grace doctrine. Thus, Romans does not show that anyone believes in General Revelation as General Revelation is never enough to save. Yet, it is enough to condemn. In fact, that is all that General Revelation does.

"He directeth it under the whole heaven, and his lightning unto the ends of the earth.After it a voice roareth: he thundereth with the voice of his excellency; and he will not stay them when his voice is heard...Fair weather cometh out of the north: with God is terrible majesty...Men do therefore fear him" (Job 37:3-4,22,24).

The Hebrew word translated "fear" in this verse means "to inspire reverence or godly fear or awe" (Gesenius's Lexicon).

This demonstrates that "all men" have the ability to know that God exists and all men therefore have the ability to have a reverence of God.

Again, if I made an error then tell me exactly what it is.

Thanks!

I think you are placing too much emphasis on things. Everyone through general revelation can know there is a God, but they cannot know the living and true God. This only comes through the Gospel of Jesus Christ. They need to know Jesus Christ and Him alone for the forgiveness of their sins. Because someone may conclude through General Revelation that there is a god who exists, they know nothing of salvation for only Jesus Christ can forgive. There is no other name given whereby man might be saved. A generic god cannot save, but only condemn. The Gospel of Grace is what can forgive.

Thus, General Revelation is of the law. It condemns but never saves. This is the entire point of Romans.

 

[Ruiz]

Ruiz, feel free to hold your posts to me for now so as to concentrate on the post from Jerry. I hope we have many years to discuss together. I do not need all my questions answered now. :thumbsup:

No problem

 

[Jerry Shugart]

When we argue the point is two fold, to show the irrationality of their own belief and then move to the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

You ignored what I said, that the cannot know the things of God unless they receive the Spirit. You are putting the cart before the horse.

This is where we disagree. I believe someone will not believe unless the SPirit regenerates the person. This is the work of God and not their work.

What you say there directly contradicts what Paul said, that one must receive the Spirit before he can understand the things of God:

"For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God. Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God" (1 Cor.2:11-12).

There is only one way of receiving the Spirit and that is by believing the gospel, as evidenced by the following rhetorical question asked by Paul:

"I would like to learn just one thing from you: Did you receive the Spirit by the works of the law, or by believing what you heard?" (Gal.3:2).

No one can know the things of God until he receives the Spirit and that does not happen until he believes the gospel.

You have got it backwards.

The filling of the spirit and regeneration are two different issues.

Do you deny that being "born again" is referring to "regeneration" and not being filled with the Holy Spirit?:

"Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God...and this is the word which by the gospel is preached unto you" (1 Pet.1:23,25).

Every Calvinist that I know agrees that the phrase "born again" refers to regeneration. And at this passage a person cannot be regenerated apart from the gospel. Again, you have it backwards:

It is through regeneration will they believe, so then we turn to the Bible and Special Revelation.

Try turning to the Bible first because no one is regenerated apart from the gospel.

The key word of disagreement is "when" as when you say that they are condemned "when" they reject God.

I never said that. Instead I said:

Those who "suppress the truth" of that which God has made plain are "without excuse" when they deny the existence of God.

That is exactly what Paul wrote.

Thus, Romans does not show that anyone believes in General Revelation as General Revelation is never enough to save. Yet, it is enough to condemn. In fact, that is all that General Revelation does.

Again, you are wrong. Not only do all men have the ability to know that God exists but all men have the ability to "fear" God:

"He directeth it under the whole heaven, and his lightning unto the ends of the earth.After it a voice roareth: he thundereth with the voice of his excellency; and he will not stay them when his voice is heard...Fair weather cometh out of the north: with God is terrible majesty...Men do therefore fear him" (Job 37:3-4,22,24).

The Hebrew word translated "fear" in this verse means "to inspire reverence or godly fear or awe" (Gesenius's Lexicon).

This demonstrates that "all men" have the ability to know that God exists and all men therefore have the ability to have a reverence of God.
Those who believe in God's existence and have a reverence for Him based on nothing more than the light of nature will also "seek the Lord," as witnessed by Paul's words spoken to the Gentiles who worshipped the "unknown God" at Athens:

"And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation; That they should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after him, and find him, though he be not far from every one of us" (Acts 17:26-27).

The author of the book of Hebrews states that God rewards them who believe in God's existence and earnestly seek Him:

"And without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who comes to him must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who earnestly seek him" (Heb.11:6).

Thus, General Revelation is of the law. It condemns but never saves. This is the entire point of Romans.

The Bible says that God rewards those who earnestly seeks Him. That certainly is not speaking of "condemnation" by any stretch of the imagination!

 

[Ruiz]

You ignored what I said, that the cannot know the things of God unless they receive the Spirit. You are putting the cart before the horse.

What you say there directly contradicts what Paul said, that one must receive the Spirit before he can understand the things of God:

"For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God. Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God" (1 Cor.2:11-12).

There is only one way of receiving the Spirit and that is by believing the gospel, as evidenced by the following rhetorical question asked by Paul:

"I would like to learn just one thing from you: Did you receive the Spirit by the works of the law, or by believing what you heard?" (Gal.3:2).

No one can know the things of God until he receives the Spirit and that does not happen until he believes the gospel.

You have got it backwards.

Do you deny that being "born again" is referring to "regeneration" and not being filled with the Holy Spirit?:

"Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God...and this is the word which by the gospel is preached unto you" (1 Pet.1:23,25).

Every Calvinist that I know agrees that the phrase "born again" refers to regeneration. And at this passage a person cannot be regenerated apart from the gospel. Again, you have it backwards:

Try turning to the Bible first because no one is regenerated apart from the gospel.

I never said that. Instead I said:

Those who "suppress the truth" of that which God has made plain are "without excuse" when they deny the existence of God.

That is exactly what Paul wrote.

Again, you are wrong. Not only do all men have the ability to know that God exists but all men have the ability to "fear" God:

"He directeth it under the whole heaven, and his lightning unto the ends of the earth.After it a voice roareth: he thundereth with the voice of his excellency; and he will not stay them when his voice is heard...Fair weather cometh out of the north: with God is terrible majesty...Men do therefore fear him" (Job 37:3-4,22,24).

The Hebrew word translated "fear" in this verse means "to inspire reverence or godly fear or awe" (Gesenius's Lexicon).

This demonstrates that "all men" have the ability to know that God exists and all men therefore have the ability to have a reverence of God.
Those who believe in God's existence and have a reverence for Him based on nothing more than the light of nature will also "seek the Lord," as witnessed by Paul's words spoken to the Gentiles who worshipped the "unknown God" at Athens:

"And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation; That they should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after him, and find him, though he be not far from every one of us" (Acts 17:26-27).

The author of the book of Hebrews states that God rewards them who believe in God's existence and earnestly seek Him:

"And without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who comes to him must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who earnestly seek him" (Heb.11:6).

The Bible says that God rewards those who earnestly seeks Him. That certainly is not speaking of "condemnation" by any stretch of the imagination!

They can't know God, there is nothing anywhere in Scripture that even implies that you are saved apart from Special Revelation. Rather, Romans clearly shows that salvation is in Christ alone and mandates the preaching of the Gospel (Romans 10:14).

Romans also notes that no one can come to the God in their own will. Romans 3:10-12 states,

as it is written: “None is righteous, no, not one; no one understands; no one seeks for God. All have turned aside; together they have become worthless; no one does good, not even one.”
(Romans 3:10-12 ESV)

No one comes to God on their own, not even one person. The adamant emphasis by Paul is significant.

Again, you point about the Holy Spirit is taken and faith has implications. However, regeneration is different part of the ordo salutis than what you are quoting. Again, what you mention is not regeneration, which is why I mentioned the need to have clear definitions.

My logic proceeds like this:

No one will come to Christ, not even one, by their own will.

Something must happen to some in order for them to turn to Christ

What happens to them in order for them to turn to Christ is regeneration.

As for your belief that people can be saved without believing in the Gospel is nowhere found in Scripture. The verse in Romans 1 says nothing about justification. Romans again points on the necessity of believing in the Gospel of Jesus Christ:

for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God's righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins. It was to show his righteousness at the present time, so that he might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus.
(Romans 3:23-26 ESV)

Redemption only comes through Jesus Christ and must be received by faith. He is the justifier, not of just anyone, but of those who have faith in Jesus, not merely a god that you can know in general revelation. He mentions specifically the person of Jesus Christ.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

They can't know God, there is nothing anywhere in Scripture that even implies that you are saved apart from Special Revelation. Rather, Romans clearly shows that salvation is in Christ alone and mandates the preaching of the Gospel (Romans 10:14).

I have already shown that all men have the ability to "fear" or have a reverance of God and here is what is said about them:

"And his mercy is on them that fear him from generation to generation" (Lk.1:50).

Romans also notes that no one can come to the God in their own will.

Of course we come to him by faith and it is impossible to will yourself into believing something that you do not yet believe. In other words, if a person could "will" themselves to believe something then that would mean that they already believe that fact. So a person's "will" has nothing to do with coming to faith.

Romans 3:10-12 states,

as it is written: “None is righteous, no, not one; no one understands; no one seeks for God. All have turned aside; together they have become worthless; no one does good, not even one.”
(Romans 3:10-12 ESV)

You are taking those verses out of context because once we examine the context we can see that what is said only applies to those that do not fear God:

"There is no fear of God before their eyes" (Ro.3:18).

However, regeneration is different part of the ordo salutis than what you are quoting. Again, what you mention is not regeneration, which is why I mentioned the need to have clear definitions.

Do you deny that the term "born again" is referring to regeneration?

When we argue the point is two fold, to show the irrationality of their own belief and then move to the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

You ignored what I said, that the cannot know the things of God unless they receive the Spirit. You are putting the cart before the horse.

This is where we disagree. I believe someone will not believe unless the SPirit regenerates the person. This is the work of God and not their work.

What you say there directly contradicts what Paul said, that one must receive the Spirit before he can understand the things of God:

"For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God. Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God" (1 Cor.2:11-12).

There is only one way of receiving the Spirit and that is by believing the gospel, as evidenced by the following rhetorical question asked by Paul:

"I would like to learn just one thing from you: Did you receive the Spirit by the works of the law, or by believing what you heard?" (Gal.3:2).

No one can know the things of God until he receives the Spirit and that does not happen until he believes the gospel.

You have got it backwards.

 

[Ruiz]

I have already shown that all men have the ability to "fear" or have a reverance of God and here is what is said about them:

"And his mercy is on them that fear him from generation to generation" (Lk.1:50).

Of course we come to him by faith and it is impossible to will yourself into believing something that you do not yet believe. In other words, if a person could "will" themselves to believe something then that would mean that they already believe that fact. So a person's "will" has nothing to do with coming to faith.

You are taking those verses out of context because once we examine the context we can see that what is said only applies to those that do not fear God:

"There is no fear of God before their eyes" (Ro.3:18).

Do you deny that the term "born again" is referring to regeneration?

You ignored what I said, that the cannot know the things of God unless they receive the Spirit. You are putting the cart before the horse.

What you say there directly contradicts what Paul said, that one must receive the Spirit before he can understand the things of God:

"For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God. Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God" (1 Cor.2:11-12).

There is only one way of receiving the Spirit and that is by believing the gospel, as evidenced by the following rhetorical question asked by Paul:

"I would like to learn just one thing from you: Did you receive the Spirit by the works of the law, or by believing what you heard?" (Gal.3:2).

No one can know the things of God until he receives the Spirit and that does not happen until he believes the gospel.

You have got it backwards.

Yes, people fear God, but none are saved by General Revelation. General Revelation is enough for anyone to have a fear of God (it is law). Yet, it is not enough to make you a child of God or to bring salvation.

Next, you are mixing the ideas of "fear". The fear in Luke is not the same as the fear in Job. Several people are said to fear the Lord but are never saved. II Chronicles 17 (and Chapter 20) points out that all the nations feared God, but then it continues to show they were not believers in God. You, therefore, are mixing definitions. Mary is talking about special revelation, this has nothing to do with General Revelation and a specific knowledge of God, not merely a general knowledge of God. Her song is as a result of special revelation, not general revelation. Like other words in the Bible, "fear" has many uses depending on the context. Thus, not all fear brings about salvation. Only belief in Jesus Christ brings about salvation. Some fear of God is healthy, but some is not salvitic. Oh, and Mary's prayer is specifically a Jewish prayer talking about the Jewish people. She was very specific on her context.

Born again is referring to regeneration. John 3 clearly notes that we must be born again, which will result in faith. John 3 says that we cannot even see the kingdom of God unless we are born again. This is clearly not physical sight, but spiritual sight into God's kingdom. Therefore, you cannot believe unless regenerated (born again) as you cannot even see God's kingdom or understand God's kingdom (Romans 3:10-12). That is the point of reformed theology. We are regenerated then we can see, and finally we believe. It is not them receiving the spirit, it is the Spirit which births them, then they can believe. I don't put the cart before the horse, but rather say that unless they are born again they cannot believe. Regeneration must come first then they can see second.

Now you again mischaracterize my view on the Holy Spirit that I have addressed. I said there is a difference between regeneration (John 3) and the indwelling and filling of the Holy Spirit. You seem to want to link the two as being one, which is not something I have done. Yet, you believe that I believe regeneration is the filling and indwelling, and that is not my belief. We are regenerated which results in faith and repentance, which results in justification and indwelling. Now, they are all essentially simultaneous. but distinct.

So you argument is moot in your verses. You seem to think I disagree with your verses, which I do not. I make a distinction based upon John 3 that is more nuanced. I do not believe regeneration equals filling or baptism of the holy spirit. I think I have clearly stated my disagreement and position.

Yet, you didn't address the idea that "no one seeks after God, no not one." This is a very clear verse

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Yes, people fear God, but none are saved by General Revelation. General Revelation is enough for anyone to have a fear of God (it is law). Yet, it is not enough to make you a child of God or to bring salvation.

So all people who have not been fortunate enough to hear special revelation have no chance to be saved?

Of course that cannot be true because the Lord wishes that all men be saved:

"Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth" (1 Tim.2:4).

Next, you are mixing the ideas of "fear". The fear in Luke is not the same as the fear in Job.

Of course you merely assert that but the following verses demonstrate that there is no difference:
　
"For as the heaven is high above the earth, so great is his mercy toward them that fear him. As far as the east is from the west, so far hath he removed our transgressions from us" (Ps.103:11-12).

"Though a sinner do evil an hundred times, and his days be prolonged, yet surely I know that it shall be well with them that fear God, which fear before him" (Eccl.8:12).

Several people are said to fear the Lord but are never saved. II Chronicles 17 (and Chapter 20) points out that all the nations feared God, but then it continues to show they were not believers in God.

Of course the verses do not mean that every single person in those nations feared God. But the leaders reverenced God to such an extent that they did not attack His special people.

Thus, not all fear brings about salvation.

All men have the ability to believe that God exists (Ro.1:19-20) and all men have the ability to fear Him ( Job.37:24) and all men have the ability to seek Him (Acts 17:37) and here is what the Bible says about them:

"And without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who comes to him must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who earnestly seek him" (Heb.11:6).

So all men have the abilty, through the light of nature alone, to be rewarded by God. And since they can be rewarded we can know that their faith in God which comes solely through the light of nature is sufficient to please God:

"And without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who comes to him must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who earnestly seek him" (Heb.11:6).

It is those who "believe God," no matter what that revelation might be, who are blessed.

Born again is referring to regeneration.

Yes, and a person cannot be "born again" apart from the gospel:

"Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God...and this is the word which by the gospel is preached unto you" (1 Pet.1:23,25).

Therefore we can understand that before a person can be regenerated he must first hear the gospel. But you do not understand this principle and you have a person being regenerated BEFORE hearing the gospel or any Special Revelation:

It is through regeneration will they believe, so then we turn to the Bible and Special Revelation.

That is the point of reformed theology. We are regenerated then we can see, and finally we believe. It is not them receiving the spirit, it is the Spirit which births them, then they can believe. I don't put the cart before the horse, but rather say that unless they are born again they cannot believe. Regeneration must come first then they can see second.

Then why did you fail to address what I said here that demonstrates that you are wrong?:

First Paul said that one must receive the Spirit before he can understand the things of God:

"For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God. Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God" (1 Cor.2:11-12).

There is only one way of receiving the Spirit and that is by believing the gospel, as evidenced by the following rhetorical question asked by Paul:

"I would like to learn just one thing from you: Did you receive the Spirit by the works of the law, or by believing what you heard?" (Gal.3:2).

No one can know the things of God until he receives the Spirit and that does not happen until he believes the gospel.

Now you again mischaracterize my view on the Holy Spirit that I have addressed. I said there is a difference between regeneration (John 3) and the indwelling and filling of the Holy Spirit. You seem to want to link the two as being one, which is not something I have done.

I never said any such thing. I challege you to quote me saying what you accuse me of saying.

Yet, you didn't address the idea that "no one seeks after God, no not one." This is a very clear verse

I certainly did. Here is what I said:

You are taking those verses out of context because once we examine the context we can see that what is said only applies to those that do not fear God:

"There is no fear of God before their eyes" (Ro.3:18).

 

[The Biblicist]

So all people who have not been fortunate enough to hear special revelation have no chance to be saved?

Of course that cannot be true because the Lord wishes that all men be saved:

"Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth" (1 Tim.2:4).

You have previously stated there is no salvation apart from the gospel. What is that but special revelation and what is that but restricting salvation to special revelation (gospel)?? Do you believe adults can be saved without hearing and believing in the gospel? If not, is not that restricting salvation to special revelation?

Jesus said "NO MAN" cometh to the Father but by him! Yet, not all men hear the gospel or know Jesus Christ.

People do not go to hell just because they refuse the gospel! They go to hell because they willfully reject whatever light they have been given.

 

[The Biblicist]

Of course you merely assert that but the following verses demonstrate that there is no difference:

　
"For as the heaven is high above the earth, so great is his mercy toward them that fear him. As far as the east is from the west, so far hath he removed our transgressions from us" (Ps.103:11-12).

"Though a sinner do evil an hundred times, and his days be prolonged, yet surely I know that it shall be well with them that fear God, which fear before him" (Eccl.8:12).

Does not ecclesiastes deal with a contrast between the SINGULAR "sinner" who does evil and the PLURAL "them" who fear God?

In regard to the sinner who does evil does not the scripture clearly say they have "no fear" of God in the sense of reverential fear as such a fear would restrain them from doing evil??? However, the sinner who does evil and is sent to hell is described as "fearful"

Re 21:8 But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.

But does not God promise in the very text you provide that those who "fear" God it "shall be well with them."

"Though a sinner do evil an hundred times, and his days be prolonged, yet surely I know that it shall be well with them that fear God, which fear before him" (Eccl.8:12).

The Philistines were "afraid" of God but they were not converts of God nor did things go well with them:

1Sa 4:7 And the Philistines were afraid, for they said, God is come into the camp. And they said, Woe unto us! for there hath not been such a thing heretofore.

There is clearly different uses of fear in the Bible. It is used as a term to describe the Lord's people in contrast to the lost. They fear God in the sense of reverential fear that is displayed by restraining from disobedience to God.

In contrast, the lost have no fear of God in the sense of reverential fear that restrains sin and promotes obedience and yet they fear God's judgement.

Paul used it to distinguish those who respect God from those who do not:

Ac 13:16 Then Paul stood up, and beckoning with his hand said, Men of Israel, and ye that fear God, give audience.

The theif who was convicted of his sin asked the unrepentant theif:

Lu 23:40 But the other answering rebuked him, saying, Dost not thou fear God, seeing thou art in the same condemnation?

Hence, in some contexts it used as a technical description for the true people of God and that distinguishes the lost from the saved precisely as it is used in the very text you gave in Ecclesiastes between the SINGULAR "sinner" and the PLURAL "them."

 

[Jerry Shugart]

People do not go to hell just because they refuse the gospel! They go to hell because they willfully reject whatever light they have been given.

What about those whose only light is the light of nature? Please answer this question:

Will God send a man to hell who is unfortunate in the sense that he never heard the gospel even though he believes that God exists and he is seeking God?

As already demonstrated all men have the ability to know that God exists and all those who believe that have the ability to seek Him. With that in view do we not know that all men have the possibility of being rewarded by God?:

"And without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who comes to him must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who earnestly seek him" (Heb.11:6).

According to this verse those who are rewarded have faith because without it it is impossible to please him. Surely God rewards those with whom He is pleased. Do you agree?

You have previously stated there is no salvation apart from the gospel. What is that but special revelation and what is that but restricting salvation to special revelation (gospel)??

My words were in regard to what Paul said here:

"And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent: Because he hath appointed a day, in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he hath ordained; whereof he hath given assurance unto all men, in that he hath raised him from the dead" (Acts 17:30-31).

Since the Lord Jesus commanded the gospel to be preached to every creature then all men are to hear it and be judged according to the gospel. Before this God could "wink at" or overlook the ignorance of men in regard to the things concerning God and I believe that He still can overlook the ignorance of those who have not heard the gospel of Christ.

 

[The Biblicist]

What about those whose only light is the light of nature? Please answer this question:

Will God send a man to hell who is unfortunate in the sense that he never heard the gospel even though he believes that God exists and he is seeking God?

First, if salvation is secured by never hearing the gospel then lets keep it a secret so all can go to heaven!!!!

Second, the Bible directly contradicts your "if" scenario by saying there is "NONE that seeketh after God, no, NOT ONE" - Psa. 14:2; Rom. 3:10-11. So I will not go down "hypothetical lane" when the Bible flatly denies such a lane exists.

As already demonstrated all men have the ability to know that

You jumped from fact to fiction. Fact is that all men have the ability to perceive a God exists but that does not mean they have ability to know him personally. Knowing him is "eternal life" and comes only through the gospel of His Son (Jn. 17:3; 2 Cor. 4:6).

 

[billwald]

>You have previously stated there is no salvation apart from the gospel.

Exactly what does this concept mean? Does it mean that no one is saved except by the events described in the Gospel or something else? Is the good news about the events or about the text that describes the events? Or something else?

 

[billwald]

>Fact is that all men have the ability to perceive a God exists

How about people born brain dead? Gravely mentally disabled? Insane? (hard problems make bad laws)

 

[The Biblicist]

>You have previously stated there is no salvation apart from the gospel.

Exactly what does this concept mean? Does it mean that no one is saved except by the events described in the Gospel or something else? Is the good news about the events or about the text that describes the events? Or something else?

I understand him to mean the "preaching" of the gospel

 

[billwald]

>I understand him to mean the "preaching" of the gospel

Nothing like including one's job description in one's theology. <G>

Then we (group decision) can force God to stop saving people by refusing to preach? God can't regenerate anyone unless there is preaching?

 

[Ruiz]

So all people who have not been fortunate enough to hear special revelation have no chance to be saved?

Of course that cannot be true because the Lord wishes that all men be saved:

"Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth" (1 Tim.2:4).

I am sorry, but that is a very large theological/philosophical leap. In order for us to realize the truth of the verse, we must look at the verse in context. First, for the moment, I am going to let your interpretation of "all men to be saved" go uncontested at this point. Why? The point you are making would be opposed by the various beliefs on that part. What most will disagree with you would say (both reformed and non-reformed) is the following.

1. Your interpretation could just as easy be applied to Universalism. In fact, your interpretation is the universalist interpretation.

2. The Context demands you to read that God wants them to come into the knowledge of the "truth." This is not merely General Revelation, but the Bible refers to the truth being that of Jesus.

3. The context specifies that this salvation is based upon the mediatorial work of Jesus Christ. Paul turns to Special Revelation to show the focus of this knowledge and salvation. He is not referring to General Revelation at all, but to specific revelation of God.

Of course you merely assert that but the following verses demonstrate that there is no difference:
　
"For as the heaven is high above the earth, so great is his mercy toward them that fear him. As far as the east is from the west, so far hath he removed our transgressions from us" (Ps.103:11-12).

"Though a sinner do evil an hundred times, and his days be prolonged, yet surely I know that it shall be well with them that fear God, which fear before him" (Eccl.8:12).

Of course the verses do not mean that every single person in those nations feared God. But the leaders reverenced God to such an extent that they did not attack His special people.

They do not say anyone apart from knowing Special Revelation were saved either. You are clearly assuming where clear scriptures speak.

All men have the ability to believe that God exists (Ro.1:19-20) and all men have the ability to fear Him ( Job.37:24) and all men have the ability to seek Him (Acts 17:37) and here is what the Bible says about them:

"And without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who comes to him must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who earnestly seek him" (Heb.11:6).

So all men have the abilty, through the light of nature alone, to be rewarded by God. And since they can be rewarded we can know that their faith in God which comes solely through the light of nature is sufficient to please God:

"And without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who comes to him must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who earnestly seek him" (Heb.11:6).

You illustrate the reason I do not like the debates. Someone brings up a verse and without explanation of that verse. I would invite your exegesis of Romans 3, as that is a clear verse. Yes, there is the command to have faith. Yet, we also know that faith if a gift (Ephesians 2:8-9). The question is, does the command most necessarily means we are given the ability? You believe it does. I will say that the Bible says that since faith is a gift, it demands that we have been given that gift. As well, since "no one seeks after God, no not one" is true, then my faith and my grace is dependent upon God. Yes, it is impossible to please God apart from faith. Yes, faith is commanded. However, that does not mean every one can believe.

You will undoubtably say that God does not command something that we are not able to obey. Yet, he commands us to be perfect. Yet, we are unable to be perfect. We are made perfect by God.

I still cannot believe that despite all the evidence, you believe someone is saved by General Revelation. That is nowhere found in Scripture. That is man centered philosophy and not considered Biblical theology.

Yet, for laughs, what theologian are you getting this stuff from.

Yes, and a person cannot be "born again" apart from the gospel:

"Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God...and this is the word which by the gospel is preached unto you" (1 Pet.1:23,25).

Therefore we can understand that before a person can be regenerated he must first hear the gospel. But you do not understand this principle and you have a person being regenerated BEFORE hearing the gospel or any Special Revelation:


Then why did you fail to address what I said here that demonstrates that you are wrong?:

First Paul said that one must receive the Spirit before he can understand the things of God:

"For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God. Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God" (1 Cor.2:11-12).

There is only one way of receiving the Spirit and that is by believing the gospel, as evidenced by the following rhetorical question asked by Paul:

"I would like to learn just one thing from you: Did you receive the Spirit by the works of the law, or by believing what you heard?" (Gal.3:2).

No one can know the things of God until he receives the Spirit and that does not happen until he believes the gospel.

I never said any such thing. I challege you to quote me saying what you accuse me of saying.

I certainly did. Here is what I said:

You are taking those verses out of context because once we examine the context we can see that what is said only applies to those that do not fear God:

"There is no fear of God before their eyes" (Ro.3:18).[/QUOTE]